ResourceShelf first mentioned the DeepDyve search tool about a year ago. The post contained a link to an Information Today overview article by Marydee Ojala.

Included in Marydee’s 2008 post was this paragraph summarizing the service at that time:

The number of search engines that concentrate on surfacing information from the deep web is growing. One company, which last week changed its name from Infovell to DeepDyve (www.deepdyve.com), has decided to expand into the consumer internet search market. It will also offer a fee-based version ($45 per month), called DeepDyve Pro, with advanced functionality such as dynamic foldering, visual clustering, and expanded filtering.

Well, things have changed a bit at DeepDyve.

In the past few days DeepDyve announced that they will begin RENTING scholarly literature, primarily science content, at the individual article level. It may exist elsewhere but this is the first time we’ve heard of scholarly content rented at the article level.

Marydee Ojala is once again on the scene.

Here are a few key points we learned from her must read article that was published on Thursday. It’s titled, “DeepDyve’s Rent-to-Own Service.”

+ You can search by entering a keyword(s) or by entering a sentence or paragraph. DeepDyve can handle up to 25,000 characters in its search box.

+ Items found in the DeepDyve database with publishers that are not part of the rental program will offer previews.

From the DeepDyve site:

“Preview Only” refers to those articles which can only be previewed but not rented because DeepDyve does not currently have permission from the publisher. If you would like to download and purchase Preview-Only articles, or any of our Premium articles, you may click the “Download Article from Publisher” link. DeepDyve will take you directly to the article at the publisher’s website to complete your transaction.

+ DeepDyve’s CEO, William Park, believes that renting an article first and then purchasing it will be a popular way to use the service. According to Park “the current conversion rate for article purchase is .2%; with the major constraint being high price.”

+ The rental price is $.99 for 24 hours.

+ Rented articles can ONLY be read on the computer screen. No downloads, screen caps, etc. Flash based proprietary system locks down the material.

+ Monthly plans are also available. The Silver Plan at $9.99/month allows for up to 20 rentals per month with up to seven day to view te the articles. The Gold Plan a $19.99/month offers unlimited rentals and unlimited time to access the articles.

Much More After a Click

(more…)

From a Wired Article:

Google plans to launch a music service, Wired.com has confirmed with sources familiar with the situation. Next to nothing is known about the service at this point, rumored to be called “Google Music,” “Google Audio,” or “One Box,” although we have confirmed that it will be announced next Wednesday, and that it will link out to two music services: Lala and iLike.

Google will not become a music retailer itself, but will offer enhanced music search with a streaming function — first of possibly several vertical search offerings. Searching for an artist or song will apparently bring up a box (thus Google’s working title: “One Box”) with a streaming link randomly assigned to stream songs from either Lala or iLike, the latter of which was acquired by MySpace in August.

[Snip]

Google’s music search service, whatever it ends up being called, will include music from all four major labels and, most likely, all of the indie content on iLike and Lala (as one insider put it, it would be harder to remove a subset of songs from those services than to let Google simply index all of it)

[Snip]

Google has yet to respond to our requests for comment. The company is also building the back-end for the majors’ upcoming Vevo music video service, and operates a free download service in China that TechCrunch says will not resemble whatever Google launches here in the U.S. and possibly elsewhere as well.

After this music search product launches next Wednesday, we understand that Google plans to release other search verticals, possibly including a travel booking service.

Source: Wired

But that’s not all folks. How about another music launch next week?

From the NY Times:

The social network Facebook, which has been toying with bringing music to its site for at least a year, will also take its first step by integrating Lala [which also will have its music on Google's new service] into its popular gift store, according to Brandee Barker, a Facebook spokeswoman.

[Snip]

Music from Lala will be part of that effort, said John Kuch, a Lala spokesman.

[Snip]

There will be two ways to buy songs: For 10 cents, or one Facebook credit, users can buy Web songs that can be played by the recipient online in perpetuity. Or they can pay full price, probably a dollar or 10 credits, then download the song and transfer it to a music player.

Earlier today we posted details about the introduction of the Barnes & Noble eBook reader named nook. The event is scheduled to begin at 4pm EDST. Well, it’s now past 4pm EDST so we can say the nook is here. Here’s the official news release (PDF) from B&N.

Engadget has posted a 3.5 minute video tour (from B&N) of the nook. Want a close-up of the device? Here you go. Want more video and still images? Visit the nook press kit.

Paul Biba has an excellent, detailed filled report from the product launch at TeleRead.

Some of the things we learn:

Device will sync with more devices than Kindle – over 100 devices and will have an app for Nokia.

No browser on the device cause is a clumsy experience. Lending can be to an Nook, PC, iPhone, Mac, etc.

No plans to sell at other retailers.

Are plans to bundle hardcover and ebooks.

Will eventually support Windows Mobile.

The Digits blog from the WSJ live-blogged the event.

Some of what we learn:

nook will use AT&T wireless network to deliver content.

Expected ship date, November 30th.

***You will also be able to lend from or to any device that has the B&N eReader application, that includes iPhones and Blackberry’s.***

You can lend many of your books once for 14 days. While it’s being lent, you’ll not be able to access the book.

As the FAQ explains points out a book can only be lent once. The Publisher’s Lunch eNewsletter points out:

…the company’s web site clearly states that a given ebook can only be lent “one time.” One publisher told us that BN was initially trying to secure broader lending rights but pulled back based on broad publisher resistance.

Publishers Lunch also points out that not all publishers are part of the lending program.

Uses Google’s Android Operating System

“It’s very clear to us that … our customers want e-books.” This represents a multibillion dollar strategy for B&N, with the first step was bn.com for purchasing e-books, “any book, anywhere, any time.” The second step is today.–Stephen Riggio, CEO, Barnes & Noble.

The nook store is now live at nook.com. Here’s some of what you can learn when you visit:

Over 1 million titles, Many titles at $9.99, also eMagazines, and eNewspapers.

“Thousands” of free books.

nook Pre-Orders at $259, free shipping.

Take a 360 degree tour of the device.

2GB of storage, you can add more.

The nook FAQ is loaded with answers.

For examples, you can listen to MP3’s while you read.

The nook handles ePub and PDB files, as well as MP3s, PDFs, and JPGs.

Also, online this afternoon is this page from Barnes & Noble that compares their new eBook reader with Amazon.com’s Kindle. You’ll also find pages with tech specs and accessory info. And like any good product or service these days, Nook has a blog. It’s titled, “Unbound: The eReading Blog.”

TeleRead has a nice roundup of coverage since we first posted early this morning. Also, worth a mention is this article from News.com.

*** In a New York Times article, Brad Stone he speaks with Shayna Englin, a political consultant in Washington who has found a way to exploit Amazon.com’s e-book technology for the kind and share books with others.

…she has actually never paid for an e-book. Exploiting a loophole in Amazon’s system, Ms. Englin has linked her Kindle to the Amazon account of some nearby friends, allowing all of them to read books like “The Lost Symbol” at the same time — while paying for them only once.

“I read much more, I tend to read faster for some reason, and I read a greater variety of things,” said Ms. Englin, adding that this is nearly the same as lending a physical book to friends. “We haven’t really looked closely at Amazon’s terms of service. But I do suspect we are breaking the rules.”

I don’t know if we will ever find out but we wonder if Amazon will close the loophole.

From a NY Times Article:

The device features color touch-screen controls and a gray-and-white reading display. It will cost $259, matching Amazon.com’s most recent price cut for its latest edition of the Kindle.

According to an advertisement that Barnes & Noble placed in the Oct. 25 issue of The New York Times Book Review and which was distributed to publishers on Monday, the [our emphasis] Nook will permit readers to lend their digital books to friends and download books wirelessly.

Ed. Note: You cannot lend books to friends with the Amazon.com Kindle. We wonder if B&N lending feature will be available for all titles or only selected ones?

[Snip]

The advertisement for the Nook says that consumers will be able to “access over one million e-books, newspapers and magazines.” About 500,000 of the books available at BN.com can be downloaded free, through an agreement with Google to provide electronic versions of public domain books that Google has scanned from university libraries. These editions are currently not available on the Kindle.

The Nook will feature the same kind of electronic ink technology used by Kindle and other devices. It will be sold in Barnes & Noble stores as well as on a Web site, nook.com.

Access the Complete Article

Source: The New York Times

See Also: Barnes & Noble Reader Out Tuesday (via WSJ)

From the Article:

What are people looking for on social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook? According to a new study, Twitter users are most interested in general news items, while Facebook users are most apt to click on tech-related links.

About 28.49 percent of the links people click on inside Twitter go to news sites, according to data from online advertising network Chitika. About 22.56 percent are related to movies, 13.39 percent are about technology, 7.98 percent relate to medical information, and the remaining 27.58 percent were classified as “other.”

[Snip]

On Facebook, about 33.22 percent of users clicked on tech-related links, while 18.29 percent went for lifestyle stories. News was third on the list with 18.25 percent, while how-to sites attracted 4.55 percent of traffic. Again, about 25 percent fell into “other.”

Source: AppScout

See Also: Access the Complete Report From Chitika

On Wednesday, the ResourceShelf team posted an above average amount of items to the weblog. To see all of the items, click on the “older entries” link at the very bottom of each page. This link is available at any time and it allows you to go back many days and review posts. If you’re only looking at the first page of ResourceShelf you might be missing some useful content. Another way to get to page 2 is by using this link. Use the same URL (just change to 2 to a 3) to move backwards to the next page of postings.

Of course, you can see each item as we post it by using the ResourceShelf RSS feed or Twitter feed.

Today, we’re going to experiment, save you a click, and list some of the items from Wednesday (yesterday) in this post. Again, don’t forget, if you want to see items that are not on the front page, simply click the “older entries” link at the bottom of each page.

Now, some of Wednesday’s posts that didn’t make the front page as of Thursday morning.

+ The Mobile Researcher: McGraw-Hill Professional Business Books Become iPhone Ready, Over 600 Titles Will Be Available by End of ‘09

+ Disabled Students Need Accessible Books

+ Digital Literacy: iPods as Learning Tools at the Elementary School Level

+ Mandela Opens Archives for New Memoir & Related Mandela Web Resources

+ To Kill a Mockingbird Challenged in Toronto, Ontario (Updated 10/15)

+ Eldercare and Aging: Online Information for Librarians and Caregivers

+ Google, Microsoft Boost Search Share; Yahoo Declines Both Facebook & Twitter Share Continue to Grow

+ Cool! Machine Learning by Watching and Listening

+ Ebook Reader: First Photos of Barnes & Noble eBook Reader Appear

+ Best Free Reference Web Sites 2009: Eleventh Annual List from RUSA Machine-Assisted Reference Section (MARS)

+ Berkeley Law School Professor on Google Book Search and Libraries

+ New from OCLC: Metadata Services for Publishers to Enhance Title Metadata

+ Free Live Concert Recordings on Your Computer and Now Your iPhone

+ Online Database: Missouri Environmental Emergency Response Tracking System (MEERTS)

You can follow our Twitter feed that combines ResourceShelf and DocuTicker postings at: http://www.twitter.com/resourceshelf.

We hope you join us.

If that doesn’t work for you, no worries. You can also follow us via two separate feeds.

A ResourceShelf ONLY feed is available at:
http://www.twitter.com/infoboy

A DocuTicker ONLY feed is available at:
http://www.twitter.com/docuticker

Access Jinni

Jinni has been around for many months as a private beta (you needed to request an invite). Yesterday, the beta became available to all. Jinni is a resource that might be very useful in a library and for library users. It’s both useful and fun (especially if you’re a tv and/or film fan).

+ Register (free) to receive personal recommendation. However, you don’t have to be a registered user to use the database.

+ Search by entering plots, moods, titles, people, etc.

+ Limit your search to: All, Movies, TV, Shorts, Free Online (Content that can be viewed online).

+ You can focus your results (left side of page) by category. Some of the top-level categories are mood, plot, genre, time period, praised, based on, etc. Click on any one of these to find sub-categories.

ITVT has an overview article about Jinni. You can access it here.

From the article:

According to the company, the site is designed to help consumers find movies (including movies on DVD and in theaters), TV shows, and Webisodes that match their personal “tastes and moods,” and features a “unique Taste Engine” that combines semantic search, personal recommendations and user profiling.

[Snip]

Core features of Jinni.com, according to the company, include semantic search (i.e. search that can find results for such semantically/syntactically complex queries as “thought-provoking sci-fi” or “action movie with a surprise twist”), personalized recommendations, and integration with (including the ability to hyperlink to) the catalogs of such content providers as Netflix, Apple iTunes, Amazon, Hulu, and LOVEFiLM, among others. The site also features what Jinni calls the “Movie Personality Sketch,” billed as a visual presentation of the essentials of each user’s unique movie taste; as well as various community features.

[Snip]

Jinni says that its service is powered by what it calls “the Movie Genome,” which it says contains several thousand “genes” that are assigned to each title to describe mood, style, plot, setting and other features, and that provide “a rich alternative to the usual genre language.” According to the company, new titles are automatically indexed via analysis of user reviews and metadata, using a proprietary “Natural Language Processing” solution. This automated process, the company says, makes for efficiency, consistency and a diversity of viewpoints from analyzing multiple user reviews

Access Jinni
(more…)

Here are three databases that will be of greatest interest to business and legal researchers. However, other researchers (e.g. journalists) might also find them useful.

From the Bankruptcy Database Project Web Site Home Page:

The Bankruptcy Database Project [BDP] reports information on U.S. bankruptcy filings from open court records. We present two basic types of data: petitions filed and persons filed. We provide three analyses of our data: (1) filings under each chapter of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, (2) commercial and noncommercial filings, and (3) filings by legal entities and by individuals. The chapter is counted as of the date of filing and is not adjusted if the case is later converted to a different chapter.

The Administrative Office of U.S. Courts (”AOUSC”) also releases statistics on the number of bankruptcy filings. The Bankruptcy Database Project data will differ from the AOUSC statistics. To the best of our knowledge, these differences result from several factors, including rules for counting reopened cases and joint petitions and for determining whether a case is a business case.

Learn more about the differences and why they happen here in a blog post by Professor Robert Lawless.

Automated Access to Court Electronic Records (”AACER”) has provided the proprietary data that makes this web site possible. Everyone at the BDP at Harvard thanks AACER for its continued support and commitment to improving public policy through access to information.

The home page also provides two graphs that illustrate Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 filings during the past 6 months. Click the link below the graph and you can view a graph of filings during the past 12 months.

You can create a custom search by using the Bankruptcy Filings Database

Fields include (Note the Explanations on the Right Side of Page):

+ Date Range (Available data goes back to January, 2006.)

+ Types of Petitions to Display (Chapter 7, Chapter 11, Chapter 12, Chapter 9, Chapter 13, Chapter 15)

+ For Each Type of Petition You Can Select:
++ Commercial & Noncommercial
++ Individual & Entity
++ Total Individuals & Total Petitions

+ You Can Also Select All Chapters Combined

+ Select to Display Results For the Entire Date Range or Sorted by Month

+ Select Whether to Group the Results by Judicial District

+ Select the Format in Which to Return the Results (Chart, Table, CSV File)

The BDP Web Site Has Bios and CV’s For Its Two Directors: Professor Robert M. Lawless and Professor Elizabeth Warren as well as several Fellows.

Finally, You’ll Find Links to Papers by Bankruptcy Project Directors and Fellows

Source: BDP at Harvard Law School

The BDP Also Provides Links to Two Related Databases

1) Bankr Law Project (U. of Illinois Law School)

By selecting a date in the form below, BankrLaw will return the text of the United States Bankruptcy Code for any date between January 1, 1980, and today. The United States Bankruptcy Code is codified at title 11 of the United States Code and has been amended numerous times since its original enactment.

2) Web BRD: A Window on the World of Big-Case Bankruptcy (from Professor Lynn M. LoPucki at UCLA Law School)

Web BRD is the most powerful business bankruptcy research tool on the web. Web BRD enables you to design and instantly execute an empirical study of large, public company bankruptcy cases in seconds — in the most complete, accurate data available anywhere.

Web BRD is a byproduct of my empirical research on large, public company bankruptcies. Over a period of almost twenty years, I have collected the data from those studies — more than 150 fields of data on each of more than 700 cases — in the Bankruptcy Research Database.

The Web BRD contains the 20 most useful fields from the Bankruptcy Research Database. I make this data available free so that journalists, researchers, lawyers, judges, and the idly curious can have a bird’s eye view of how the United States Bankruptcy Courts interact with large, public companies.

From Marketwatch:

Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers said in a filing Tuesday with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that they intend to amend their settlement agreement, which could hand Google considerable influence over the digital books market.

Days after the U.S. Justice Department issued a stinging criticism of Google Inc.’s proposed legal settlement with authors and publishers, the Internet company and its courtroom rivals have moved to postpone a related fairness hearing scheduled for early October.

“It is because the parties wish to work with the DOJ to the fullest extent possible that they have engaged, and continue to engage, in negotiations,” Google and the plaintiffs said in their court filing Tuesday.

“Because the parties, after consultation with the DOJ, have determined that the settlement agreement that was approved preliminarily in November 2008 will be amended, plaintiffs respectfully submit that the fairness hearing should not be held, as scheduled, on October 7.”

Instead, the plaintiffs and Google request a “status conference” to be held Nov. 6.

See Also: Breaking: Google Book Settlement Hearing Is Postponed (via Open Book Alliance Blog)

This is a huge victory for the many people and organizations who raised significant concerns that this settlement did not serve the public interest, stifled innovation, and restricted competition. It’s also an enormous loss for Google, which had been saying for months that no changes were necessary to the settlement. Now, that settlement, as we know it, is dead.

Note: An “official statement” from the Open Book Alliance is posted below.

See Also: Google Working to Modify Settlement, Publishers Say (via Bloomberg)

Gabriel Stricker, a Google spokesman, said in an e-mailed statement that the company won’t be filing its own request for a postponement. “We are considering the points raised by the Department of Justice and others, and we look forward to addressing them as the court proceedings continue,” Stricker said.

See Also: Parties seek Google Books hearing delay; new deal brewing (via News.com)

When the Department of Justice made it clear last Friday that it could not support the settlement as written–which would give Google unique rights to scan out-of-print books still protected by copyright law–it said the parties were in talks to amend the settlement. In a joint brief, lawyers the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers, and others asked Judge Denny Chin to delay a hearing on whether to approve the settlement while the parties work out the new terms of the settlement with the DOJ.

See Also: Authors seek delay in Google books settlement (via Reuters)

For its part, Google agreed with the decision to delay the hearing. “We are considering the points raised by the Department of Justice and others, and we look forward to addressing them as the court proceedings continue,” it said in a statement.

See Also: New deal sought in Google book dispute (via AP)

Lawyers for the authors and publishers said in court papers Tuesday that, “as the United States government put it, no one wants `the opportunity or momentum to be lost.’”

See Also: Parties pull Google Books settlement, promise a version that meets Justice approval (via ZDNet)

Now the question is, how extensive will the rewrite be? How strongly will the new settlement support universal access to scanned works, open formats, equal treatment of authors? Will Google still have special status with regard to orphan works? Will the new settlement address other concerns like privacy at all?

See Also: Plaintiffs Ask for More Time in Google Book Search Case (via IDG News Service)

Until now, Google, the Authors Guild and the AAP have maintained that the proposed settlement will be beneficial to authors, publishers and readers by making it easier to find, distribute and purchase books, especially those that are out of print.

However, critics have raised several objections, including what they perceive as excessive control by Google over prices. They have also expressed concern over “orphan works,” books that are under copyright but whose owners can’t be found because the author has died or the publishing house disappeared.

See Also: Delay sought in Google book deal hearing (via Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal)

See Also: Authors and Publishers Ask Court to Postpone Google Books Trial (via Post I.T./Washington Post)

See Also: Google book deal to be reopened (via CBC)

See Also: Delay sought in Google book settlement hearing (via AFP)

See Also: Google Requests Hold On Book Settlement Hearings To Retool The Agreement (via Search Engine Land)

See Also: Plaintiffs In Google Books Settlement Try To Delay Hearing (via TechCrunch)

See Also: Official Open Book Alliance Statement (via PR Newswire)

“We hope that Google and its partners learn the right lessons from this fiasco and start over in an open and transparent manner. They must create a robust process that includes input from all stakeholders, including authors, libraries, independent publishers, consumer advocates, state Attorneys General, the Justice Department, and Congress. This opportunity cannot turn into another negotiation behind closed doors.

See Also: Read the Full Text of the Memo in Support of Motion for Adjournment of Fairness Hearing

See Also: Extensive Press Review of Department of Justice Filing from Friday, September 18th.
Our press review includes the full text of DOJ filing and several stories that have been released since then.

From the Blog Post:

Since part of our analysis involved studying how profiles of their customers on Twitter changed between late March and mid-June of this year, we thought it would be interesting to study the effect of Twitter’s 60% growth during that time on these influencers. So, we analyzed follower and following counts for the company’s top 0.1%, top 1% and top 10% most-followed Twitter users, and compared how these figures changed in nine short weeks.

For this study, we analyzed over 40,000 “active” Twitter users, which were defined as users with at least five followers, five friends, or five updates.

Summary of Findings

* The most followed users gained followers at a faster rate than less popular users, contributing to a growing “popularity gap”
* Users in the top 0.1% have around 5x as many followers as users in the top 1% and about 40x as many followers as users in the top 10%

Source: Rapleaf

From the News Release:

The American Library Association (ALA), the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) today submitted a supplemental filing with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York overseeing the proposed Google Book Search settlement to address developments that have occurred since the groups submitted their filing on May 4.

While the library associations’ position has not changed since their initial filing, the groups believe that recent activity, such as an amended agreement reached between Google and the University of Michigan, the University of Texas-Austin and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Google’s recent public statement regarding privacy, and the library associations’ communication with the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) should be brought to the court’s attention. In their supplemental filing, the library associations call upon the court to address concerns with pricing review, to direct Google to provide more detail on privacy issues, and to broaden representation on the Books Rights Registry.

+ Access the Supplemental Filing (PDF)

+ Access the May 4th Filing (PDF)

Source: American Library Association Washington Office
Hat Tip: @misseli

See Also: Paula Hane’s: “Anti Google Book Settlement Organizations Band Together in Open Book Alliance”
The New York Library Association and Special Libraries Association are members of the Open Book Alliance.

From the Article:

Google Inc’s plan to digitize millions of books would violate German copyright law and the country’s privacy protections for Internet users, the German government said in a U.S. court filing.

Germany opposes a proposed settlement, which Google reached with the Authors Guild and Association of American Publishers Inc among others in October 2008, because Google could digitize books by German authors without their consent, according to filing dated Monday.

[Snip]

Wichard also noted clashes between Google’s plans and German requirements that Internet users’ privacy be ensured.

“By failing to ensure similar or adequate privacy protections, the settlement violates well-established national and international privacy laws,” Wichard wrote.

Here’s the full text of the filing via Justia

Source: Reuters

This Onion News Network video story discusses something new from Google. (-:

Access the Video Clip Here

Source: The Onion

From the Post:

In a relatively short time, the EPEAT system (Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool) has become the green standard for computer products in the U.S. And now the rating program — which ranks PCs and displays based on 51 environmental criteria and compiles the information into a searchable database — is expanding its reach internationally.

With the expansion, buyers in the U.S., Canada, Europe, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and Mexico will be able to assess products based on environmental performance in their country.

[Snip]

EPEAT’s registry features roughly 1,300 products and more than 30 manufacturers. Omelchuck said more than $60 billion worth of purchase contracts now require that the products be EPEAT-registered. U.S. federal agencies are required to buy EPEAT-registered products for at least 95 percent of their needs.

Direct to EPEAT Database

Source: Reuters