Ben Brooks has been all over this Readability debate. Another interesting read.
3 thoughts on “Readability foul”
Ben Brooks would have more credibility if he allowed comments.
Why? So people could wilfully digress from any point he was trying to make?
We live in an increasingly disintermediated world – i.e. where we are getting rid of more and more middlemen. This is what makes Readability curious – they’re trying to become a new middleman by working their way in between consumers and providers and of course to take a cut for doing so.
That they’re trying to redefine part of the publishing distribution process by charging users, rather than publishers is a really interesting approach.
There are of course also some *really* interesting questions here about copyright, fair use and derivative works that need to be explored…
Ben Brooks would have more credibility if he allowed comments.
Why? So people could wilfully digress from any point he was trying to make?
We live in an increasingly disintermediated world – i.e. where we are getting rid of more and more middlemen. This is what makes Readability curious – they’re trying to become a new middleman by working their way in between consumers and providers and of course to take a cut for doing so.
That they’re trying to redefine part of the publishing distribution process by charging users, rather than publishers is a really interesting approach.
There are of course also some *really* interesting questions here about copyright, fair use and derivative works that need to be explored…