Flat World Knowledge Continues To Innovate: Make Your Own Textbook Platform

from the very-cool dept

Wed, Apr 27th 2011 11:20pm — Mike Masnick

We've been impressed by Flat World Knowledge from its very early days. The company offers open source textbooks, and has a business model that really fits with what we talk about: the books are free online (even without registration). But if you want a printed version, or certain additional conveniences, you have to pay. And, as an "open source" textbook company, it's always encouraged "remixing" of the textbooks in question to meet different classroom needs. However, it's now taken things a step further by launching a platform to make it easy to "make your own," by taking a textbook and remixing it, editing it, etc, directly in their platform. As soon as you're done, the new version becomes a "published" version. So a professor can create the "perfect" textbook for his or her class, building on the works already offered. This seems like a very useful offering for lots of professors.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: make your own, open source, textbooks
Companies: flat world knowledge

12 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Alphager, 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:11am

Nice but not innovative
It's nice, but not innovative. I remember that O'Reilly hat the same offering in 2004.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 12:35am

Re: Nice but not innovative
It's nice, but not innovative. I remember that O'Reilly hat the same offering in 2004.

Yeah, but a ton of content at FWK...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:10am

Re: Nice but not innovative
It's not innovative, per se; many, many textbook companies offer this service. However, this usually means paying even more for some slight customization, and often means the end product (the student's textbook) is of substantially lower quality.

I know some universities 'strongly encourage' professors to use personalized textbooks, because those textbooks can only be bought though that university's affiliated booksellers. FWK is doing the academic world a great service by offering freely-available personalized textbooks.

I don't that O'Reilly has gone quite so far in this area, but they are another of the more respectable publishers as regarded by my personal acquaintances. I don't much care which of them comes up with a good idea, so long as that idea is out in the world helping people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 1:22am

Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
I don't that O'Reilly has gone quite so far in this area, but they are another of the more respectable publishers as regarded by my personal acquaintances. I don't much care which of them comes up with a good idea, so long as that idea is out in the world helping people.

So is this where O'Reilly sue, claiming to have a patent that covers the online remixing of textbooks thus killing the idea and "helping drive innovation"? Or is that just be being cynical....?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 3:02am

Re: Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
if, like far too many other companies, they are run by idiots and/or lawyers, sure.

otherwise, they find a way to be better, or serve a wider customer base, either of which leads to more sales for them (though the former also deprives FWK of customers, in theory, while the latter does not, also in theory)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Berenerd (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 5:51am

Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
My school does this (I am going back for another degree). The issue is they charge a whole 170bucks for a book for a 1 credit course which costs $250 to take. This allows them to say they have a lower tuition than other schools that offer the same thing. its innovation of how to lie to students. I am smart enough to go to the company that makes them to get a copy (for about half the price) but kids just out of highschool tend not to know they can do that. I have a habit on the first day of class to get in trouble for speaking out of turn when I say that to the class. Teachers can't do anything but say "but those are not the right version) even though the only difference is the typos are fixed in the one I have.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jon Renaut (profile), 28 Apr 2011 @ 6:38am

For the greater good
This is a really positive thing for the rest of the country that thinks more open sharing of knowledge/content is generally a good thing. Nearly everyone gives more leeway when it's done in the name of education, and hopefully soon we can point to FWK and their success as a concrete argument in favor of scaling back copyright laws.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:33am

Re: Nice but not innovative
It's far more innovative enough to be patent worthy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:39am

Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
It's far more than innovative enough to be patent worthy *

(this statement is made within the context of our broken patent system and within the context of what IP maximists generally consider innovative).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:40am

Re: Nice but not innovative
Besides, I think you miss the point. The point is that IP is not necessary for innovations to occur.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 8:53am

Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
(and better business models that don't include overly restrictive copy protection limitations are possible, so copy protection laws don't have to be nearly as restrictive and one sided as they currently are. Book publishers don't need to overly scam the public to publish innovative new books).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2011 @ 9:13am

Re: Nice but not innovative
"It's nice, but not innovative."

It is innovative. You're confusing inventive with innovative.
[ link to this | view in thread ]