On 2005-06-14, Old Man <bill@witch.lan> wrote:
>
> Are you sure the RUTE book is licensed under the GPL? Really? The book
> inludes the GPL in an appendix, but I don't see anywhere that the work is
> licensed under the GPL. In fact they call the document found at
> http://www.icon.co.za/~psheer/book/copying.html.gz a license, and it is
> most definitely not the GPL.

>
> The documents belonging to (copyright owned by) the FSF are generally
> licensed under the GNU FDL, which generally provides the same freedoms and
> protections as the GPL. The documents are frequently published in paper
> form by O'Reilly, and, in those cases, O'Reilly owns the rights to their
> printed version. However, O'Reilly is not always the sole publisher of the
> work, as the FDL grants the right to print and distribute to
> anyone/everyone.
>

Actually, I think you're 100% right. I probably saw the GPL and assumed more
than I should have...my mistake.

ken

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:27:18 +0000, Al. C wrote:

>> No, only in a conversation in which you are a participant can this happen.
>> In fact, the probability of that happening is exactly 100%.
>> Congratulations, Al, you've done it again. You must be so proud of
>> yourself.

> You got played again, Dan.

Sure, Al. Right on. Everyone here believes that, and you. Yup.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

Al. C wrote:
> copyright law. And I don't know of where the GPL has withstood a legal
> challenge.

from what i hear, no gpl violation has ever been taken to court yet,
because they are usually settled beforehand. with the violator admitting
guilt and mending his ways, that is.

you may want to look here for some more info: <http://www.gpl-violations.org>.

--
Joost Kremers joostkremers@yahoo.com
Selbst in die Unterwelt dringt durch Spalten Licht
EN:SiS(9)

Al. C <no_spam_ac3_takeout@adams-blake.nospam.com> wrote:
> You should be very proud of the work you and your associates did. It's a
> very excellent piece of research and I have no doubt that it would sell
> well if published in hard-copy. If P.V. came to us and offered our company
> exclusive trade rights (web-stores, bookstores, computer stores, Costco,
> PXs, etc.), we'd invest the money (takes about $20,000 to do it right) and
> put it out there.

What part of "the book already has a publisher" from my last reply to this
thread did you not understand (or forget) between yesterday and today? Let
me repeat myself:

From my understanding, the book already has a publisher and a hard copy
already exists that one can purchase via the Slackware Store. If you wish
them to change publishers, have your friends drop Slackware Inc. a line.
Mentioning on the group is rather pointless since the decision makers for
Slackware the company are not regular lurkers here.

Read, digest, repeat. If you are after reasonable discourse, you will
divert your attentions to contacting PV on this matter. If you are after a
flame war, you will ignore this reply and continue on arguing with your
favorite "pack of dogs".

Cichlidiot wrote:

>
> What part of "the book already has a publisher" from my last reply to this
> thread did you not understand (or forget) between yesterday and today? Let
> me repeat myself:
>

Melissa Danforth, you fail to understand something about the publishing
business. Being a graduate student at UC Davis (about 30 miles from me) I
assume you hope one day that your Ph.D. thesis will be published, so you
might want to learn more about how the publishing industry works. Technical
books are often 'published' by several entities for different markets,
different countries/languages, different distribution channels, etc. If you
want more detail, contact me privately.


> From my understanding, the book already has a publisher and a hard copy
> already exists that one can purchase via the Slackware Store. If you wish
> them to change publishers, have your friends drop Slackware Inc. a line.
> Mentioning on the group is rather pointless since the decision makers for
> Slackware the company are not regular lurkers here.
>

Again, that's not how it usually works. The book industry is quite mature
and is far more genteel than others (and especially more genteel than this
list!) It's 'bad manners' for publisher B to to go publisher A and say "Let
us publish your book as we can do a better job." In practice publisher A
would seek out a different entity to work with it. If Slackware Linux, Inc.
contacted us with an solicitation to license rights to us to bring their
book to the trade (or various sectors of it) we'd consider it. But we would
not approach them first. It's just not done.


> Read, digest, repeat. If you are after reasonable discourse, you will
> divert your attentions to contacting PV on this matter. If you are after a
> flame war, you will ignore this reply and continue on arguing with your
> favorite "pack of dogs".

Melissa I know your entire generation has an 'entitlement to be rude'
mentality but in real life you are just a young graduate student and would
be well advised to act like a team-player and not show your arrogance.

Jobs are hard to come by even (especially) for those with advanced degrees
(unless you want to learn Hindi and go to India.) Acting as a prima donna
is not going to help you once you get your degree. That boat has sailed.
Indeed, many potential employers will do a 'sanity' check on you by seeing
what you've posted on newsgroups. It's not a big deal for someone with a
successful track-record of 'doing', but a young person just starting out,
well she doesn't have much else to show besides an academic record... and
not many companies believe that anyone coming out of school is actually
'job ready.' You are going to have to demonstrate to an employer (or a
department if you want to pursue a career in academia) that you are a
team-player... a get-along/go-along woman... and your paragraph above is
not going to help you in that endeavor.

Reject it if you wish, but its the best advice you will get all day.

Al C.

Al. C wrote:

> Technical books are often 'published' by several entities for different
> markets, different countries/languages, different distribution channels,
> etc.

Wait! How can that be?! You mean that a copyright holder can license other
people to make and distribute copies under specified conditions? Really?
Just like the GPL? And nobody gets sued?

One last question. Does Al know the meaning of "rhetorical?"

--
Old Man

No_One wrote:
> On 2005-06-14, Old Man <bill@witch.lan> wrote:
>
>>Are you sure the RUTE book is licensed under the GPL? Really? The book
>>inludes the GPL in an appendix, but I don't see anywhere that the work is
>>licensed under the GPL. In fact they call the document found at
>>http://www.icon.co.za/~psheer/book/copying.html.gz a license, and it is
>>most definitely not the GPL.
>
>
>>The documents belonging to (copyright owned by) the FSF are generally
>>licensed under the GNU FDL, which generally provides the same freedoms and
>>protections as the GPL. The documents are frequently published in paper
>>form by O'Reilly, and, in those cases, O'Reilly owns the rights to their
>>printed version. However, O'Reilly is not always the sole publisher of the
>>work, as the FDL grants the right to print and distribute to
>>anyone/everyone.
>>
>
>
> Actually, I think you're 100% right. I probably saw the GPL and assumed more
> than I should have...my mistake.
>
> ken
>


For a summary of the different licenses available, see

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

Old Man <bill@witch.lan> wrote:
> One last question. Does Al know the meaning of "rhetorical?"

Unlikely. Mean-spirited and trolling however he seems to have down to a T.
Now were I the prima dona he accusses me of being, I would contact my
lawyer friends about his postings of my personal information in a manner
that could be considered menancing (or at least out to poison Google
searches against me, note the full use of name and references to
employers). But I am far more a lady than he is a gentleman, and I know my
future employeers would likely consider the thread as a whole, so I will
let his posting slide as that of a troll. So much for attempting
reasonable discourse with him or in this case informing him of the facts.
From his responses to this and previous threads, it would appear he is not
after reasonable discourse or facts. I will now follow this lovely classic
Usenet sign about Mr. Canton in the future and I suggest others do the
same (although I know some will not be able to resist the urge):

\|||/
(o o)
,----ooO--(_)-------.
| Please |
| don't feed the |
| TROLL's ! |
'--------------Ooo--'
|__|__|
|| ||
ooO Ooo

Cichlidiot wrote:

> Now were I the prima dona he accusses me of being, I would contact my
> lawyer friends about his postings of my personal information in a manner
> that could be considered menancing (or at least out to poison Google
> searches against me, note the full use of name and references to
> employers).

Never attribute to malice that which can be easily explained as stupidity.

--
Old Man

Cichlidiot wrote:
> I would contact my
> lawyer friends about his postings of my personal information in a manner
> that could be considered menancing (or at least out to poison Google
> searches against me, note the full use of name and references to
> employers).

Personal information?

Ms. Danforth, the info is right in your own headers. And a simple Google
shows you affiliated with UC Davis.

Organization:
University of California, Davis
Melissa Danforth <[snip]@vici.ucdavis.edu>
X-Complaints-To:
usenet@ucdavis.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date:
Tue, 14 Jun 2005 22:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent:
tin/1.4.7-20030322 ("Suggestions") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u))

Had I posted something about you that I couldn't find from available public
documents you might have a case. The keyword being 'might.' I posted your
name and your school. No lawyer is going to buy your conspiracy theory.

But let's continue the dialectic for a bit. If Usenet is being 'poisoned' it
is being poisoned by your OWN words, not mine. YOU are responsible for what
you post. I know that "taking responsibility" is another trait that so many
of your generation don't seem to understand, but as you get older you will
find out that in real life you really do have to eat your own dog food.

"Youth is wasted on the young."
George Bernard Shaw (Irish literary Critic, Playwright
and Essayist. 1925 Nobel Prize for Literature, 1856-1950)

Al C.