214 lines
8.9 KiB
HTML
214 lines
8.9 KiB
HTML
<!-- MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
|
|
<!--X-Subject: Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal -->
|
|
<!--X-From-R13: Bbrg/Xbfuhn Renxr <cbrgNyvahkcbegf.pbz> -->
|
|
<!--X-Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:28:46 -0400 (EDT) -->
|
|
<!--X-Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.21.0007301909340.4393-100000@crazypenguins.commandprompt.com -->
|
|
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 20000730161430.B135@localhost -->
|
|
<!--X-Head-End-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</title>
|
|
<link rev="made" href="mailto:poet@linuxports.com">
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
[<a href="msg03589.html">Date Prev</a>][<a href="msg03591.html">Date Next</a>][<a href="msg03587.html">Thread Prev</a>][<a href="msg03596.html">Thread Next</a>][<a href="maillist.html#03590">Date Index</a>][<a href="threads.html#03590">Thread Index</a>]
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-->
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
|
|
<h1>Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</h1>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><em>To</em>: David Lawyer <<A HREF="mailto:dave@lafn.org">dave@lafn.org</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Subject</em>: Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</li>
|
|
<li><em>From</em>: Poet/Joshua Drake <<A HREF="mailto:poet@linuxports.com">poet@linuxports.com</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Date</em>: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:25:31 -0700 (PDT)</li>
|
|
<li><em>Cc</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org">ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org</A>, Richard Stallman <<A HREF="mailto:rms@gnu.org">rms@gnu.org</A>>, <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>In-reply-to</em>: <<a href="msg03587.html">20000730161430.B135@localhost</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-date</em>: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:28:46 -0400 (EDT)</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-from</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-message-id</em>: <9u-p.A.uOD.lKPh5@murphy></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
|
|
<pre>
|
|
>A major defect of the existing policy is the case where a document is
|
|
>not maintained, but prohibits modification without permission of the
|
|
>author. We wind up with obsolete documents that sometimes can't be
|
|
>updated. I think (in theory) that we need to change our policy of
|
|
>what we will accept and from now on not accept documents that can't be
|
|
>modified if the author fails to maintain them to reflect new software
|
|
>(and new hardware in some cases).
|
|
|
|
This is not a defect as when the document becomes unmaintained and/or
|
|
obsolete it need to be "re-written" anyway. Therefore there would be no
|
|
copyright issues.
|
|
|
|
>I think (in theory) that a license should at least allow distributing
|
|
>a modification if the original author failed to adequately maintain
|
|
>the document. Who is to judge what "adequately maintain" means?
|
|
|
|
That would be tough you are correct.
|
|
|
|
>I would argue that regarding benefits to the author, there is not a
|
|
>great deal to be gained in selling the exclusive right to publish if
|
|
>such work is first (weeks in advance of the work appearing in
|
|
>bookstores) put on the Internet at the 200 LDP mirror sites.
|
|
|
|
I don't believe this to be true, both O'reilly and OpenDocs have had great
|
|
success with it.
|
|
|
|
> The
|
|
>electronic media has a big advantage here since it appears first and
|
|
>is free in price. I think that many people who buy such a work may
|
|
>not realize that they can get it free. Another advantage of getting
|
|
>it via the Internet is that one learns how to get free updates and
|
|
>some documents are updated monthly (or so). As time goes by, the
|
|
>share of the market by electronic media should grow and that of print
|
|
>media decline.
|
|
|
|
That is what they keep saying, yet book stores keep having to make there
|
|
shelves taller. I am not being snide, I used work in a book store. I saw
|
|
the continued growth and I still see it today.
|
|
|
|
>Thus I don't see the possibility of making a living by
|
|
>writing such documents and selling them for printing (while
|
|
>distributing them free electronically in advance of printing). The
|
|
>fact that one can get the same info for free tends to reduce the price
|
|
>of such books and also reduces author royalties.
|
|
|
|
This is the ultimate question. Currently about 40% of my revenue comes
|
|
from technical writing. All of which is free on the net. If I were to put
|
|
my mind to it, I could probably make it 70%.
|
|
|
|
It is possible, if one has the means to create a publishable quality
|
|
document. If it is truly publishable quality, the fact that it is on the
|
|
Net, will not effect it. It may actually help the sales of a printed book.
|
|
|
|
Personally I like electronic documentation, but I don't like it when I
|
|
have to wade through a 500 page PDF.
|
|
|
|
>Thus I don't think Poet's proposal would bring authors much financial
|
|
>benefit and it would go against our principles of free documentation.
|
|
|
|
I can refute this in several ways. One of the reasons some of the LDP
|
|
authors do not make money at their documentation is that it is not very
|
|
good.
|
|
|
|
**FLAME SUIT ON***
|
|
|
|
Look, I am not knocking the "technical quality" of the documents, but most
|
|
of the document grammar (including my own) is horrid. Our documents are in
|
|
no way close to publishable quality.
|
|
|
|
If an author was able to produce or subsidize his/her living with the
|
|
documentation, it would see more attention. More attention typically would
|
|
equate to higher quality.
|
|
|
|
**CATCH 22**
|
|
|
|
Most publishers will not attempt to publish a document if the grammar is
|
|
so bad they would have to pay an editor for 6 months to fix it. O.k. 6
|
|
months would be a HUGE book but you get the point.
|
|
|
|
I still state;
|
|
|
|
We accept all Linux Documentation that is freely "Electronically
|
|
Distributable". If the copyright/license does not support the FSF
|
|
definition of "Free". The document will be tagged/classified.
|
|
|
|
The classification will state something simple like - "non-free"
|
|
|
|
Joshua Drake
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Anyway, authors are now free to grant exclusive printing rights and
|
|
>distribute the same free electronically. They just don't put it on
|
|
>the LDP sites. However, I think we should link to the sites where
|
|
>they do distribute their half-free docs. Do any such sites exist?
|
|
>
|
|
> David Lawyer
|
|
>
|
|
>
|
|
>--
|
|
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
--
|
|
<COMPANY>CommandPrompt - <A HREF="http://www.commandprompt.com">http://www.commandprompt.com</A> </COMPANY>
|
|
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC. - <A HREF="http://www.opendocs.org">http://www.opendocs.org</A> </PROJECT>
|
|
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts - <A HREF="http://www.linuxports.com">http://www.linuxports.com</A> </PROJECT>
|
|
<WEBMASTER>LDP - <A HREF="http://www.linuxdoc.org">http://www.linuxdoc.org</A> </WEBMASTER>
|
|
--
|
|
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
|
|
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03596" href="msg03596.html">Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> David Lawyer <dave@lafn.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03613" href="msg03613.html">Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Miroslav Skoric <m.skoric@EUnet.yu></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
|
|
<!--X-References-->
|
|
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03587" href="msg03587.html">Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> David Lawyer <dave@lafn.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-References-End-->
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Prev by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03589.html">Re: Voila! A compromise!</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03591.html">Re: Voila! A compromise!</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Previous by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03587.html">Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03596.html">Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Index(es):
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="maillist.html#03590"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="threads.html#03590"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|