Saturday, December 31, 2005

探討「深層次矛盾」

Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang said when Premier Wan Jiabao said there were "deep conflicts" in Hong Kong, he was referring to economical problems and not political. Tsang further said that the problems here were the "three highs": high land prices, high rents and high salary. Quite obviously, those are not our real problems. The roots of the problems we face are anti-competition hurting our competitiveness, by making the distribution of opportunities unfair -- not just wealth. When will our government has the courage to face up and act about the truth?

探討「深層次矛盾」

  溫家寶總理在會見香港特首曾蔭權時,說了一句香港有「深層次的矛盾和問題尚未得到根本解決」,所指為何,中國政治向來多玩猜謎語,各種評論解釋,只供各界各取所需,很難即時斷定真正意義。不過,作為擁有第一手接觸者的曾特首的澄清,似乎很難令人信服。

  曾蔭權說溫總所指的是經濟問題,與政治無關,只不過是經濟轉型未達完善,而「三高」問題,即高工資、高租金、高地價,正影響我們的競爭力。這說法只反映曾蔭權利用市民對政治紛爭沒有結果,致有點厭倦這種反應情緒,以圖拖慢民主政改步伐,轉移視線,這是政治公關手段。

  其實,「三高」對個別企業和營運者當然是令人困擾的問題,但在地區(或國家)層面,即出自特首描述香港經濟時,若然仍視之為負面的因素,就屬於非常短視,甚至犯了根本的經濟學錯誤;又或者,曾蔭權早知問題所在,只不過欲言卻不盡。

  工資、租金和地價都有各自市場供求調節,「三高」其實都是別的因素的後果,至少,經濟好時,市場才會推向「三高」,若然政府貿然干預,無論原因目的為何,明年香港在什全球經濟自由度排名下跌的話,就別多加辯駁了。

國際城市皆「三高」

  香港以國際城市自居,就不要忘記,沒有哪個一流國際城市不是「三高」的,問題只在於能否持續;可持續發展已經成為很多人常掛在口邊的名詞,但有多少地區能做到好像硅谷、倫敦,甚至東京這些地方,能配合持續發展的「三高」現象?

  香港的租金和地價高並非問題本身,出現問題的是少數地產商壟斷市場,甚至跨越至其他必需產品及服務市場,電食往行等無一倖免,令財富累積不公,社會貧富懸殊只是表層問題,真正可能令香港經濟停滯不前的,是連對未來創富的機會也集中化,少數集團機會愈來愈多,其他的就愈來愈少,這才是香港經濟問題的基本矛盾,港府面對公平競爭問題一直掩耳,要到什時候才可拿出一點道德勇氣?

  香港的工資高亦非問題本身,其實,香港的平均工資已比高峰時大幅下降,反而,不久前有國際人力資源公司研究指香港工資高是吸引國際人才的最大優勢;出現問題的是人才不足,人力資源錯配,港府一直沒有政策開發知識型經濟背後的發展條件,一切都只是空洞地說說了事,支持創意、創新產業政策乏善足陳,每日卻要承受接收低水平的內地移民,香港變了福利磁石,也沒勇氣或能力向中央爭取,這要比多開放幾個自由行城市有意義、有必要、有好處得多。

  再者,工資高亦非普遍現象,低學歷技能人士不能轉型,他們的工資亦每下愈況,一半是因為再培訓教育政策及執行的失敗,另一半是因為缺乏創造支持創新產業的政策和環境,決策者被大地產集團拖鼻子走,這是香港經濟的基本矛盾之二,而非部分稀缺人才工資高這正常市場現象。

  傳統經濟學理論在處埋國家或地區的比較優勢時,集中考慮土地、地點、天然資源、勞工、人口因素,而這些因素是難以政策短期調節的,這種靜態角度,早已過時,但即使以這傳統分析,也是以資源考慮為主,絕不會集中重視成本,否則愈落後地區的競爭力豈非愈高。這些因素是政府能主動影響的,政府也必需這樣做。

「創意產業」原地踏步

  研究企業和國家競爭優勢的管理學大師波特在他的經典著作《國家競爭優勢》早已指出,世界是動態的,競爭和需求把企業推向創新和生產力提升,只有不斷創造專有生產要素,如技術、人才、資金、基建,而非倚賴可容易替代的靜態因素。波特多次研究都證實,「最具競爭力的國家或企業已不再是那些能夠獲得低成本投入的國家或企業,而是那些能以最先進的技術和方法使用投入的國家或企業。」

  波特曾說,全球競爭力的典範必須擁有迅速創新的能力,而香港政府研究「創意產業」已研究了多年,現在策發會又再講一次,港府對經濟與政治議題的處理方法原來一致,不能迅速創新,連循序漸進也不算,只有原地踏步。

刊載於《信報》中港評論 2005年12月31日

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

A bold new step for democracy in Hong Kong

Earlier today (December 21, 2005), the proposals in the government bill based on the Report #5 on constitutional reform was voted down by the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, with less than a two-thirds majority approval. Many people considered this to be a defeat for democratic progress, a disappointing standstill, or even a lose-lose situation. I do not believe it has been such a case at all.

The unraveling of the whole controversy has been an interesting struggle between the various stakeholders. It is most important for us to note is that, more often than not, the truth is not what meets the eye. I would venture to say that most stakeholders came out ahead as winners -- in truth or at least in their own minds -- with this "defeat" of the bill.

First, on the surface, the pro-democracy camp has "won" by sticking together and doing something they said they would do. Most importantly today, a truly terrible proposal has been turned back. The government proposal has genuinely been a step _backward_ for democratic progress, rather than an advancement that they have been repeatedly trying to fool the people of Hong Kong. But how can any bill that increases the number of functional constituency seats in Legco be any more democracy, when it is clear that it will be forever harder to remove them in the end, when you need to convince the majority of 35 functional constituencies to vote themselves out of Legco, rather than 30?

Then, what about the pro-government parties, chiefly the Liberal Party (LP) and the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB)? While these sorry characters would really not want to see Chief Executive Donald Tsang be awarded a victory with a passage of this bill, they would not dare to vote against it. How convenient and lovely it is that the stupidly stubborn or stubbornly stupid (or both) pan-democrats help to wreck the party and be the bad guys? Now, with a possibly weaker Tsang, LP and DAB may think that they have a better chance to become a factor in the 2007 CE election.

But more importantly, DAB and LP took this precious opportunity to smear the pan-democratic camp to the max, and picture the latter as preventing progressing to democracy. The sad part is that many if not most people believe in them. So, by inflicting damage on the pan-democrats, especially the Democratic Party, the DAB and LP are probably the biggest winner out of this, while the pan-democrats only won some, but also lost some in this episode.

Next, Donald Tsang himself. Outwardly he made it looked like he really wants this bill to pass. In reality, he doesn't care and he may even actively want it to fail. Why? Look at what he should think and what he actually did. First, if the proposal to expand the election committee from 800 to 1600 materializes, would you think it will be easier or harder for him to win in 2007? Obviously, a smaller election committee will be let Tsang have a good night sleep.

And, what Tsang did. He waited until two days before D-Day to put forth his final offer, which was to remove one-third of the appointed District Board seats in 2008 but with virtually no further commitment to totally remove them or when. He is not stupid, and I am sure he knew in advance that this offer must be rejected by the democrats. Indeed, that was the whole idea. He gave his opponent a poison pill that he knows the other guy will never swallow, but once that his opponent will be further accused by the gullible "public" that they gave up on the best chance to start removing the appointed DB seats.

Tsang knows as long as he comes out of this defeated bill with a clear message to blame the democrats, he will be in control until 2007 and that's all he needs. Even Beijing can't do nothing about him. So, he made sure he refused the last stepping down chance for the democrats, and further burden on them one more unswallowable poison pill, just to be 200% sure.

Even with the central government, they also don't mind seeing the bill defeated. After all, even if we trust that the central government supports universal suffrage in the end, there is no reason to believe that Beijing should want it sooner for us. So, if you people in Hong Kong fight among yourselves and nothing gets moving, Beijing shouldn't mind at all, and may indeed like this outcome best.

Finally, the people of Hong Kong also came out better -- or at least no worse -- today with this bill defeated, because they don't have to deal with 35 FCs, but only (still) 30. If only we can see through all the half-truths and even lies by the government, DAB and LP, we will win even more by not believing in them the next time.

So, all in all, this is an almost WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN situation for all. The pan-democrats, DAB, LP, the Hong Kong and central governmnts got just what they really wanted for Christmas. For the people of Hong Kong, if only we see through the smokescreen and learn our biggest political lesson, we would also win by becoming more political savvy -- something we must be if we are to exercise our power to fight and gain more democracy in future, because we just can't rely on this government and the politicians.

If someone has lost something, then it would be the pan-democrats, who have lost some public points here because of the intentional and successful smearing campaign by their political opponents, including the DAB, LP and the Hong Kong government. But still, it is not a total loss for them, because at least they stood by their principles and did what was really right for Hong Kong.

If the pan-democrats really think this was a sad day for democratic progress, then their real problem was even they had been just "waiting" for good things to happen to them, rather than coming out fighting and making deals. If anyone still accuses the pan-democrats of making Hong Kong's democratic advancement "stepping on the same spot", they should declare that Hong Kong has just made its first step forward in the direction of real, not phony, democracy. Instead of a candlelight vigil and tears, which they held tonight, they should have a band play in a celebration party for Hong Kong.

Tsang called for "democracy heroes" to come out to vote to pass the bill, in his last theatric move (although as my logic goes, I do not believe he meant it, but it was harmless to say it when he knew he would not get it). I believe the pan-democrats became accidental heroes anyway by voting against the bill. That means, they may have done the right things for the wrong reasons, and they did not even know it.

If only the people of Hong Kong will learn from this episode to look at politics beyond the face value, then we will be an even bigger winner from this. Don't believe in just what they all say. Most of the times they are meant to mislead anyway. That's Politics 101. In truth, we may have just made an important progress toward more democracy in Hong Kong today. To that, thanks to the democracy hero of 12-21-05!

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

HKITF Christmas party 2005


The Hong Kong Information Technology Federation held its annual Christmas networking hour on December 21, 2005. Pictured are the guests of the organizing and supporting organizations on stage.

內地政府網站服務欠奉

A study shows that the quality of service among e-government websites in China is lacking.

內地政府網站服務欠奉

  中國政府網站在過去數年的建設進展情況如何?內地資訊科技研究機構計世資訊(CCW Research)剛發布了《2005年中國政府網站評估研究報告》,對六十九個國務院組成部門、三十一個省級政府、三十二個各級城市、二百零一個地級政府和一百二十九個縣級的政府網站進行了綜合評估。

  在2002年時,CCW曾評估三十六個中國城市的政府網站,結果平均分僅屬不及格;三年過去,今次的評估結果顯示,中國政府網站建設品質「穩中有升」,但整體水準依然不足。如果分類來看,六十九個國務院組成部門的網站平均分仍然沒明顯改善,繼續不及格,三十一個省級政府網站平均分比前改善少許,剛剛及格。

內容充足

  總體而言,城市政府網站得分繼續較高,平均分達到合格,其中北京和上海更達到優秀水準,分別得8.3分和8.0分,是所有被評估的政府網站之中得分最高的首兩名。CCW分析指出,旅遊資訊、招商引資及重點企業推薦等,是目前很多中國政府網站的特色內容。

  是次評估劃分成三大一級指標,即網站內容服務、功能服務和建設品質,而多數政府網站所以「肥佬」,是失分於功能服務一項,換句話說,這些網站不少雖有很多內容,但卻不夠重視對使用者的效益,服務太簡單,最普遍只提供部分表格下載。

  不過,報告亦指出一些較成功的例子,如河南省鞏義市的政府網站在其「市長信箱」一欄,列出了市委、市政府、市人大和市政協領導的名單,市民可向任何一位發出電郵,市資訊辦公室收到電郵後,會列印並加蓋公章,遞送給收件人處理完畢後,再通知發信的市民,而發信者亦可在網上查閱信件處理過程。雖然此舉未能做到全電子無紙張運作,但政府對一般市民的開放溝通,總算大有幫助。

  在網站功能方面,得分最高,達8.3分優良成績的,是國家安全生產監督管理總局,其網上服務包括事故舉報、安全論壇及建言獻策等欄目。但老實說,這些功能與先進電子政務地區相比,真的不算有可突出之處。

  在三大指標中,網站建設品質幾乎同是所有網站得分最高的一項,從這可以推測到,不論資金甚至技術,網站的美觀性、易用性、條理性、時效性及瀏覽速度等,只要努力,基本上誰都能達標的,但要做好網上服務,單靠網站和技術人員卻難以實現。相比下,網站內容服務就已達基本成熟階段,除縣級政府外,其他級別政府網站都已及格,這代表政府網站的「媒體」功能,基本已經達標。

  研究結果亦顯示,城市資訊化正在加速,且快於國務院組成部門及省、地和縣級政府的資訊化速度,而且差距正在加速擴大。其中除了北京和上海達到優秀水準外,杭州、廣州、成都、深圳及青島等十個城市也達到了良好水準。CCW分析,這現象成因,來自城市上網人數的增加,及公眾對知情權和對政務公開的強烈需求,推動政府網站從以單向內容資訊發布轉向更多互動及實時資訊發布,市政府網站服務正站在前線。不過,也有頗「出位」的「三零部隊」:0是南寧、拉薩和太原這三個只得零分的城市。

香港超班

  網站建設的品質和當地經濟發展的水準,關係並非必然,例如排在前十名的省級政府網站中,分布在東部經濟發達地區的只有四個,分別是北京、上海、江蘇和浙江;中部地區有三個,分別是吉林、安徽和湖北;西部地區也有兩個,分別是陝西和雲南,還有一個是澳門(研究包括澳門,但不包括香港,相信香港必已屬超班)。排在前十名的地級政府網站中,蘇州、東莞、煙台、江門、無錫和惠州,屬於經濟較發達的城市,大慶和東營屬石油城市,而淮南和盤錦則屬於經濟落後的城市。由此可見,當地政策重視比經濟財力重要。

  既然香港在政府網站建設及運作都達國際一線水準,明顯比中國各級政府網站為優,若然能化為合作商機,香港與內地各級政府都應能得益互惠。

刊載於《信報》2005年12月19日

Monday, December 12, 2005

從香港電子證書汲取教訓

Hong Kong Post's eCert service may be coming to an end, which is inevitable. The whole story of eCert is a comedy of errors by a host of government agencies involved, and most of all, why did they not listen to voices of reasons, and carry on such policies destined for failure until its very end, only at the expense of our tax dollars and consumer interests? I truly hope they can learn yet another lesson this time.

從香港電子證書汲取教訓

  香港郵政經營的電子證書虧損連年,服務使用率低,五年來共發出約一百四十七萬張電子證書,其中一百二十萬張內置在智能身份證的,是後期在更換智能身份證免費送的。在投資虧損超過二億元後,香港郵政將邀請私營機構接手,否則將在2008年3月結束營運。

  聽到這消息,可說完全不令人意外,根本上,香港電子證書從開始就是一個錯誤,筆者多年來立場未變,現在有些「早已告訴你」的感覺。但這絕不是驕傲,只是可惜,為何政府次次總不肯及早從善如流?

  政府說,當年香港郵政委託某大學做市場調查,指出電子商貿發展前景佳,社會將對核證服務需求很高。唉,通常這些所謂市場調查就只是瞎子帶領瞎子,你想聽什我就講什。電子商貿與核證服務根本無必然互連關係,亂說亂信,只是對電貿與市場原則,毫無了解。

價格是關鍵

  電子證書是不能推動電貿發展的。這最明顯不過的,是歐美等地電貿發展較佳,也沒有設立政府主導核證服務,其發展較佳的原因主要是價格低,以及對消費者保障較佳,這兩個主因,一屬市場因素,二屬監管環境,但政府卻沒面對這些基本因素,錯誤以技術主導。

  所有研究都會發現,電子商貿發展的最大障礙,是用戶對網絡安全的擔憂,但這是因為沒有電子證書,抑或是網上服務價格沒有優勢,消費者保障不足?從歐美電貿發達地區經驗,結果很清楚,在亞馬遜買書,價格較便宜,有問題包退錢;所以,筆者一直強調,網絡安全的擔憂只是用戶的藉口,答案也絕不致於把電貿過程複雜化。

  若然一定要設立電子證書,就唯有創出市場,沒用戶哪有應用,沒應用哪有用戶?筆者五年前已經建議,香港郵政與其每張電子證書收費數十元,何不免費提供,表面上兵行險,實際上是互聯網常勝之道;即使有二百萬人之多領用,少收數千萬元,但卻是值得的投資,以眾多用戶吸引應用發展,結果,等到推出智能身份證時才這樣做,已經太晚了。

  電子證書策略完全漠視市場運作,應用電子證書的電子政府服務,完全沒有對用戶提供優惠待遇,試想,如果電子報稅、網上車輛續牌可減價1%,有多少人會肯轉用?若說這辦法對不用互聯網者不公平,那只反映決心不足。

  電子證書另一個為人詬病之處,是它的難用及不方便達到不可思議的程度,即使我們資訊科技行家中,絕大多數都只好放棄,長長的密碼,軟磁碟的分發方式,令人懷疑香港郵政是從火星來的嗎?香港郵政的宣傳手法,例牌地、落伍地找來明星代言,既無新意,更無作用。

政策局失誤

  在香港這小小市場,一個不國際化的純本土電子證書,差不多是死路一條,但數年前筆者和一位學者,向香港郵政兩位顧問花了多少唇舌,也不能令他們明白,本地電貿網站為何棄用本土電子證書,而採用國際性核證服務,是因為外地客戶不能亦不會使用香港的電子證書;總之,「官方」所賜的你不要, 有些官是永遠不會明白的。

  除了政策,執行上的問題亦暴露出兩個局之間的予盾,工商及科技局希望推動電子商貿,但香港郵政卻屬經濟發展及勞工局,要自負盈虧,但又沒有基本生意觸角,至利用智能身份證發了百多萬張電子證書,又涉及另一個保安局,和百多萬消費者市民被朝令夕改的影響。

  政府明年要推出下一階段電子政府發展計劃,電子證書本來是中心部分,如今變成極不明朗因素;另一方面,政府在此策劃及執行的問題甚至錯誤,必定要分析清楚,從中汲取經驗,不能推卸說用戶不用就算,而令電子商貿形象及發展受損。

刊載於《信報》2005年12月12日

Friday, December 09, 2005

Pan Pearl River Delta Software World 2005 in Zhuhai

On December 8, I attended the Pan Pearl River Delta Software World Cooperation and Transaction Forum. The event was co-organized on the Hong Kong side by the Hong Kong Computer Society.

I also witnessed the signing of an agreement between the Hong Kong Information Technology Federation (HKITF), Hong Kong Productivity Council (HKPC) with the Zhuhai Software Industry Association (珠海市軟件行業協會) to cooperate on the IT Collaborative Network Platform over the "IT Solution Directory" project, which was initiated by HKITF a few years ago, linking up the directory services of www.itsolution.org.hk and www.itsolution.org.cn.



During the signing ceremony, I was also delighted to see our old friends again from the Bureau of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation of Guangzhou Municipality (廣州市對外貿易經濟合作局) and Tianhe Software Park (廣州天河軟件園), which had been our original and dedicated partners in China for the "IT Solution Directory" project (above).

Later, on behalf of HKITF, I signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the representative software industry associations of the nine provinces in the Pan Pearl River Delta region (Fujian, Hunan, Jiangxi, Sichuan, Hainan, Yunnan, Guangdong, Guangxi and Guizhou 福建、湖南、江西、四川、海南、云南、广东、广西和贵州) to extend the IT Collaborative Network Platform.



In the afternoon, I chaired and moderated a discussion session on software outsourcing with an attendence of more than 150 people, with a panel of eight distinguished speakers from the China Software Industry Association (中國軟件行業協會), Zhuhai Software Industry Association, Hong Kong Productivity Council, EDS (China), Microsoft (China), etc.

Monday, December 05, 2005

一流創新要有一流人才

On December 2, the IT Matters for Hong Kong group held a roundtable event on manpower and innovation/creativity. Here's a recap of the discussions on the innovation panel.


一流創新要有一流人才

  上周五,在微軟贊助下,香港四個主要資訊科技專業及商會組織,合辦了一個圓桌座談會,得到很多業界精英參與,共同討論行業面對的兩大問題。首先是人力資源,另外是創新(innovation)與創意(creativity),筆者為後者主題部分的主持,在此總結一下當日討論內容。

  主辦者事前作預備時,已有同事提出,香港是否知道創新與創意是什?因為感覺上很多人把創意與電影等娛樂事業掛,加點兒新技術應用,就當是創新了。

  八達通卡可算是香港科技應用創新、又得到市場高度成功的好例子。八達通卡行政總裁戴勇牧先生以「能力為本(competency-based)的創新」為題,指出創新並非只關乎最新技術,並從管理經驗點出企業創新文化必須具備的條件,包括面對轉變、具彈性、肯承擔、肯冒險等。

動力來自市場需求

  業界前輩及香港資訊科技商會前會長區煒洪就用大量有趣例子,描述創新活動的特性。首先是市場是「創新之母」,沒有市場需求,何來創新動力?當然,需求本身也是可以創造的;還有轉變,八十年代初王安電腦是辦公室自動化的成功創新企業,但決意把公司傳給兒子,不出幾年公司就倒下來了;相反,微軟的蓋茨十年前還說互聯網無關重要,但很快就悄悄地完全轉變立場,這正是成王敗寇的最佳寫照。

  香港應用科技研究院行政總裁楊日昌博士,亦重申轉變速度、研發過程中,必須注視顧客(市場)、抓緊目標的重要;回應會上另一關於人力資源的主題,楊博士指出,一流的創新活動要有一流的人才,故此大學不能降低水平,應重質而非只重量。但他認為,香港訓練出來的科研人才一點都不遜色,應科院將繼續在港招聘研究員。

  香港大學電機電子工程學系 張英相教授就以葛洛夫(Andy Grove)名言:「Only the paranoid survive」為戒,表示仍對大學生水平擔憂,今天雖然仍有最頂尖的學生進入資訊科技相關學系,但成績的確下降了;面向創新文化,恐怕香港從政府以至社會並不容忍失敗,這便影響了年輕人肯去冒險的精神。張教授更指,好的校內成績,並不代表有創新能力,有時為了分數,會否反而要依書直說,不利創新。

靈感可訓練及引導

  港大電訊研究計劃John Ure教授,就從他的經濟學家背景,回應有關市場的討論:既然傳統製造業能表現巨大彈性,不論目標市場、產品、生產地都可變得這快,又能達到高利潤,科技產業為何不可?就人才市場供求,Ure認為沒有出現市場失敗,據以往英國研究結果,學生入學成績與畢業成績並無關係;在整體資訊科技市場而言,他以移動電訊市場為例,若市場出現失敗,如壟斷或不利部分行業發展,政府才加以介入。

  Ure更指出,香港的優勢是把舊知識應用於新方法,而創新甚至靈感(inspiration)應該都是可以訓練和引導的,大學和在職培訓都應該多加提供。亦有講者指這些討論活動應該讓教師、學生甚至中學生參與,到大學時恐怕已經太遲。

  電訊盈科科技創新副總裁袁立輝博士強調,必須向外發展,以受惠於全球市場。香港無線科技商會主席趙志洋就提出,要有計量創新成果的標準。

  大概因為大會以關注人力資源開始,時間有限,有些問題未能充分討論,例如政府的角色為何,有與會者認為根本不可能期望政府有創新,只能負責出錢支援;也有人認為政府應該帶頭應用,雖然兩者未必有衝突。另一些問題,例如政府創新支援和資助政策、產業發展藍圖、創投資金角色等,要待業界以後繼續探討推動。

刊載於《信報》2005年12月5日

Sunday, December 04, 2005

124 IT for universal suffrage

A group of IT people stood up today and joined the march for universal suffrage.






Friday, December 02, 2005

"IT Matters" seminar on manpower and innovation



Today, the "IT Matters" organizations (Hong Kong Computer Society, Hong Kong Information Technology Federation, Information and Software Industry Association and Hong Kong Wireless Technology Industry Association) jointly organized a half-day seminar on manpower and innovation in the Four Seasons Hotel.


[Mr Anthony Au is one of the speakers on my panel.]

I was the moderator for one of the two panels, that is, innovation. A summary of the discussion on my panel can be found in my article for Hong Kong Economic Journal on December 5 2006.


[With Mr Dennis Pang of OGCIO]


[With Ms Alice Wong (HKCS), Mr Chester Soong (HKITF) and Mr Howard Dickson (GCIO)]


[With Mr Anthony Au (HKITF), Prof David Cheung (HKU), Mr John Lee]

Thursday, December 01, 2005

電子書挑戰版權

電子書挑戰版權

互聯網的出現,對不少傳統商業模型帶來了改變,而互聯網作為傳遞資訊的技術媒體,對各種形式的訊息內容影響最大,因為技術把複制各種內容的障礙解除下來,傳統的版權控制概念一再受到挑戰。

一直以來,主流西方的版權概念,都以保障創作者利益為本。但實際上,版權持有人往往不是原創者,尤其在影音和文字作品中,版權保障往往已成為商業壟斷的藉口;而另一方面,用戶和其他互聯網企業挑戰現行商業模型,近年已多番出現不少可說翻天覆地的改變,最明顯的例子無疑是MP3下載和蘋果電腦iTunes服務對傳統唱片業的沖激。

但比唱片業更要「傳統」的,相信可算文字出版業,今年肯定是他們面對最多新挑戰的時間,例如,Google早前宣佈與著名圖書館合作把書籍掃描以提供數碼化下載,稱為「Google圖書館」的計劃,雅虎微軟的類似「開放內容聯盟」項目,微軟與大英圖書館合作把十萬冊已經再無版權的古典作品數碼化;但最受注目的,相信會是兩個最具商業化味道的計劃:一是全球最大出版商之一Random House宣佈「擁抱」網上電子書下載,二是全球最大網上書商亞馬遜(Amazon)表示計劃把書本內容「分拆」逐頁以「逐次收看」(pay-per-view)方式在網上提供,服務將稱為Amazon Pages。

很容易看出的,是亞馬遜這項販賣電子書頁計劃,與iTunes把單曲從整張唱片大碟分拆出售的相似,兩者都是把「捆綁式」銷售「鬆綁化」(unbundle);雖然,除了為了試讀之外,部份如小說的作品也許並不適合逐頁出售,但很多結集式的作品,例如食譜、旅遊書、自教(self-help)書,甚至教科書,都會很適合。其實,亞馬遜現已提供部份書籍的內容搜尋和網上預覽,從他們的經驗數據都明確可見,容許愈多的預覽,對銷售會愈好。

電子書掀貿易戰

在整個書本電子化大形勢下,大部份出版商都以兩手應付:一方面抵抗,例如出版業與作家團體分別向Google就其圖書館書籍數碼化興訟挑戰;另一方面想辦法收費。而對Google、微軟等這些電子商貿和網上搜尋公司,文字內容電子化更是對未來發展重要的突破,雖然現時已經序列的網上內容已多達一百億項,但有研究指用戶的搜尋指令仍有一半得不到想要的資料,主要原因是眾多書本內容仍未上網,而這些書籍內容,往往才是較準確、可信的。

對於版權問題,網上搜尋公司也同樣以兩手應付:一方面集中處理已沒版權的書籍,例如微軟與大英圖書館的合作,另一方面就與書商謀求合作,像亞馬遜就是如此,但當中也有較「出位」的「挑釁」性動作,比如Google雖然也有尋求與部份出版商合作,但同時又以圖書館內容電子化計劃向傳統版權模式開火,Google的理據,是版權法例下所容許的「合理使用」(fair use)原則,就像節錄、借書,甚至有限影印等行為的自由。結果如何,還待下回分曉。

其實,書籍出版商對互聯網是又愛又怕的。首先,書籍的銷售市場近年停滯不前,例如在美國從1999年至2004年,每年增長僅為1.8%,人們把時間都花到互聯網和電子遊戲上了;但網上銷書每年卻有8%至9%的增長率,但更重要的是,網上銷書同時令二手書市場有更大的增長率,從2002年佔美國書籍交易的1%升至2004年的20%。

因此,出版商未來恐怕會喪失對書籍的控制權,如果電子書籍的銷售或下載之風更盛,無論的整本或分段,出版商的角色只會被邊緣化,最終可有可無。試想,作者可以直接與亞馬遜、Google或微軟等合作,以電子方式出版銷售,用戶還可選擇印刷版的書籍,對小眾的作者而言,有可能分到較多的利潤,對一些較舊的書籍的作者和其讀者,則不用受絕版之苦了。

所以,像Random House宣佈的方法,尋求與電子商貿公司合作,的確較有遠見,較進取,但亦有點冒險。Random House會與個別夥伴談條件,但也定下了一些基本條件,例如「免費預覽」部份由出版商限定內容,而每頁「批發價」定為4美仙,建議零售價為每20頁99美仙,其中亞馬遜已經開始與Random House洽談合作。Random House表示,公司未來在這方面的收入會與作者們分享,但詳情未定。

早在互聯網革命未起動前,已經有人提倡「資訊要免費」(Information wants to be free),這部份很多人已經聽過,但大多數人都忘了下一句,就是「資訊也要賣得很貴」(Information also wants to be expensive),像互聯網新媒體的很多事一樣,總是在矛盾中充滿著機會,內容是免費還是昂貴,分別在於有無鬲效率的商業模式、收費方法、市場規模。

如果還記得另一句名言:「沒有免費午飱」﹝no free lunch﹞,結論應該是新的模式取代舊的,只是利潤重新分配而已。正常的經濟結果是,有一天中介者的成本被取代,而這取代即利潤從新分配,消費者應該得到更大效益。已對互聯網、電子商業,以至真正的創作者,應該都是有利的。

刊載於《CUP》2005年12月第47期

-->