HarperCollins uses Sigil

[Soldim]

Originally Posted by petrucci

No. But their business model is at odds with the philosophy of distributing things for free for the benefit of society. Thus, it is ironic that they take advantage of such tools just to try to make a buck.

I doubt that HC converted the eBook themselves -- generally they outsource. Most likely to the lowest bidder -- not surprising those lowest bidders try to keep profit margins up by using cheap/free software.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by elcreative

That doesn't make sense - HC uses a good program to produce books, you haven't had a bad book from them but they must suck because they give you bad books because the software is great? In any case, it doesn't matter how great the software is, it's the software in front of the computer that is using it, that's far more important...

The reality is that HC is using a good tool. Yet, the formatting could use some work.

[Ekaros]

Originally Posted by charlesatan

So it's a crime for professional publishers to use a free program?

Depends on program. In some cases commercial use is not allowed. Have to check about Sigil, but genearly it's not overly clear...

EDIT: Sigil seems to be GPLv3 so there shouldn't be issues of them using it...

[tompe]

Originally Posted by petrucci

No. But their business model is at odds with the philosophy of distributing things for free for the benefit of society. Thus, it is ironic that they take advantage of such tools just to try to make a buck.

The philosophy behind free software is not to distribute it for free. It is to give the freedom to modify the program. So I do not see any conflict here. They use a tool and contribute back to make it a better tool and they use the too to make something that is not intended to be enhanced and sell it.

It is not uncommon to use available free tools. For some time at least I think O'Reilly used MobiPerl.

[elemenoP]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Using free software helps them make more bucks.
That seems entirely in line with their business model.

Or else they think it's the best tool for the job.

eP

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by petrucci

No. But their business model is at odds with the philosophy of distributing things for free for the benefit of society. Thus, it is ironic that they take advantage of such tools just to try to make a buck.

You mean sort of like how Disney makes mega bucks out of re-using public domain works - and then campaigns to have copyright extended to protect their own creations?

Sorry - couldn't resist.