

Ask HN copyright implications of publishing book summaries - vijayr

http://www.philosophersnotes.com<p>The site sells "condensed ideas" from self help books - in the form of PDF and MP3. It is a neat idea, I'm sure busy people would appreciate it.<p>Legal (copyright) implications of this? Only a couple of the titles are in public domain.  Does this mean, he has obtained permission from the publishers/authors? Or is it allowed to "derive" works from copyrighted work, for commercial purposes?
======
anamax
> Legal (copyright) implications of this?

It depends on how the "condensed ideas" are expressed. If they're expressed
using too much of the expression of the original work, they're a derived work
and it can be a copyright problem. (Some amount of quoting is allowed - the
relevant concept is called "fair use".)

If, however, these summaries are just the ideas, expressed in a different way,
there's no copyright problem at all.

Remember, copyright covers expression, not ideas or facts. Expression includes
translation and minor edits.

~~~
vijayr
what he is doing, is summarizing the books in his own words. I guess it
shouldn't be a problem then.

------
davidw
If you liked that, you might also enjoy Squeezed Books, here:
<http://www.squeezedbooks.com> \- which is similar except for the fact that
it's open and free. Also, there are a number of other pay summary sites like
getAbstract.

~~~
vijayr
Thanks for the link davidw. The summaries at squeezedbooks look more generic,
more like reviews than summary. Also, I'm not sure wiki style is a good idea
for book summaries.

~~~
davidw
They are definitely not reviews - they tell you what the book tells you in a
condensed way.

I'm not sure that the wiki thing works either, to tell the truth:-) I haven't
been able to attract many people to contribute so far. Actually, I do think
it's a good idea and could work (wikipedia does, after all), but maybe I'm
missing something to give it some critical mass.

~~~
vijayr
I think wiki style won't work for summaries (books, movies etc). The key
difference is wikipedia is full of factual information (most of it anyway). so
it is easy for anyone to edit, fact is a fact, after all.

How do you summarize a book, like say, outliers? It is more subjective, and
when the material is subjective, it is better that one person writes it, than
many. That is probably why it isn't getting critical mass.

~~~
davidw
Most business books are more or less easy to summarize - they have a
straightforward thesis that can be condensed into a few pages. That's why
there are so many of these sites. Granted, some things might be better written
with one voice, but I don't think that's why people aren't going there.

------
yp2009
getabstract ( www.getabstract.com) has the most amount of summaries...over
5,000. They come out with about 50+ a month...so you get the latest
books....the most bang for your buck. They also obtain right for ALL the
books.

~~~
vijayr
Does this mean, that anybody who publishes summaries commercially, should
obtain permission/rights from the publishers/authors?

