[sword-devel] Often-requested yet never-available Bibles
jonathon.blake at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 17:26:51 MST 2009
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 20:25, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> because (for no good reason I can fathom) eSword has managed to convince *ALL*
a) You may not realize it, but over 50% of the user created resources
that are distributed for e-Sword, are being distributed in violation
of copyright, EULAs, and other Intellectual Property Rights;
b) Since roughly 2003, e-Sword and/or Pocket e-Sword tend to come
at the top of the list, in terms of popularity of gratis Bible Study
For the Commercial Bible Study Software companies, _The Sword
Project_, as a whole doesn't register. If any specific front end
registers on their radar, it is only as blip out there, doing nothing
in their market.
e-Sword, OTOH, is perceived as a marketing threat. One of the
oddities is that despite the different niches that the commercial
Bible Study Software programs occupy, their fear is that e-Sword will
add components/tools that are "almost good enough", and as such,
remove their "low end" clients", leaving them chasing a market
further and further up the product chain.
IOW, with _The Sword Project_, there is no digital tipping point.
With e-Sword, the digital tipping point is too close for comfort.
(This is as true, if not more true for Logos, than it is for any
other Bible Study Software program. That Logos has far more components
than e-Sword will have, is utterly irrelevant.)
> the publishers of interest to publish in that format.
If any organization has "publishers of interest" locked up, it is
Libronox Digital Library Systems. Truth is, Bob has hired people with
an extensive array of contacts in the publishing world, and has also
made Logos the premium Windows Bible Study Program. That combination
looks very attractive to publishers. When their Mac offering is
better than Accordance, they will be even more attractive to
> Why can't we in this project get that kind of publisher respect?
Obviously my perspective is biased.
The biggest factors I see are:
* How the different organizations handle money;
* Closed source versus Open Source;
* Downloaded copies, and percieved market penetration;
> What is it about the possibility of Sword module production that so repulses publishers?
a) Open Source Software scares content owners. Their understanding
is that open source means that their content will be distributed to
all and sundry, with _no_ financial, or other benefit to the original
b) The publishing world is based very much on who knows you. If you
don't have an extensive network in that industry, you won't get
anywhere. If you do have an extensive network, you might get
More information about the sword-devel