The Anti-Web Dept: I just saw a Wired article detailing iCopyright.com, a company that allows publishers to charge for links. That's right, they want you to pay for the right to put a hyperlink on your site that points to a page on their site. This is just sad and wrong on so many levels:

1. Charging for links goes completely against everything the web was meant to do. Freely connected information, remember? I don't know about you, but if it came down to paying $50 for the right to link to a news article, I'll just summarize the damn thing in my own words and keep the money. And then how will the news publisher get traffic? Mark my words. This sort of short-sighted foolishness will kill many websites. Especially now that many newspapers are going digital.



2. What about search engines? I can pretty much guarantee Lycos and Yahoo aren't going to pay $50 a pop just because some moron thinks he can charge for what every sane person on the planet gives away. And again, what do you think will happen to the hit counts of the sites that charge?



3. This all got started because many periodicals charge for reprints. This makes sense, since reprints, by definition, must be printed and shipped. But once you go digital, the old rules no longer apply (regular readers: how sick are you of hearing me say this?). Treating a hyperlink as the same thing as a reprint is lunacy, and it shows a fatal misunderstanding of how the web works. After all this time, some people still don't get it.



4. Worse, the agreement you have to sign when you purchase the link forces you to agree to make no derogatory comments about the site, the writer, or those depicted in the document. If you linked to a newspaper article about the presidential election, bam! You're prohibited from criticizing Dubya. Do I have to go into why this is wrong?

Thanks to Mike Cane for the pointer to this. I'm just flabergasted.

Wow Dept: I finally beat my Hotsync problem on the Visor and I'm reviewing Blue Nomad's Wordsmith. This is a heck of a word processor, let me tell you. I'll have a comprehensive review up soon, but if you haven't looked at this, wow. Check it out.

Amateur Efforts Dept: One of my readers recently told me that he didn't like my pricing column. He told me that I'm not an expert on pricing (duh), and that amateur efforts in that area would only decrease writers' income.

Setting aside for the moment that I just love being called an amateur (the word literally means "one who loves", and is intended to convey someone who does something only for the love of it rather than just for money; it has absolutely zero bearing on competence), I've worked the math over and over in my head, and I just don't get it. The system I worked out would garner a flat $2/copy to the author, regardless of the format of the book. Given that most authors are published only in paperback, and currently make between six and ten cents per copy, I just don't see how this is a bad thing. I really don't.

Anyone care to explain how getting two bucks is worse than getting one dime? I realize the assumptions on production and distribution costs are ballpark guesstimates, but I don't think I'm that far off...

People Who Should Know Better Still Don't Get It Dept: While reading the forums at WritersDigest.com, I ran across some truly disturbing commentary by fellow writers. The question was an old one, "will ebooks take off"? Here's a typical answer.
---
Written By: Diana L. Silva
Subject: E-Trends
Winter is here and my favorite pastime is to snuggle close to the fire with a steaming mug and a good novel. I live on the coast and in the winter months we often lose power due to high winds. Snuggling under a goose down comforter with a novel and reading by candle and oil lamp is worth the effort.
To fire up the gas generator to read an e-book doesn't thrill me.

In the summer, to relax, I hit the beach with a towel, a SoBe and a book. My computer just doesn't fit in the picture.

A novel equals relaxation, my computer equals WORK.
Some things in life are meant to stay simple.
Thank you.
---

How many times do I have to tell people that ebooks aren't just for desktop PCs? In fact, I'd say that they're not for desktops at all. I read more ebooks than anyone I know, and I never read on a desktop. Ebooks, when read on a Palm, Pocket PC or (shudder) a REB, are just as portable as pbooks. Am I the only one that realizes this?