> John Frost invects
*AHEM* I did not write the quoted material... please check your
attributions in the future.
> > I have no problem with shooting them in the gut; they have ripped off
> > our work without so much as a by-your-leave. I've been furious since
> > I heard about this, and repeated instances by other "publishers" are
> > leading me to believe that the dreaded phrase "class action lawsuit"
> > just may be the appropriate course of action. I don't really *want*
> > to do this -- it'd be long, complicated, and expensive. But if push
> > comes to shove, then I will grit my teeth, urge others to do the same,
> > and sue them until there's nothing left.
>
> Do we write FAQ's to help people, or to show off our superior
> knowledge? I don't know about you, but with me it's about 95% helping
> and only about 5% showing off. (Honestly, it's just too easy to impress
> the groups I've written or helped on FAQ's for!) So, if you're trying
> to show off, maybe Walnut Creek *is* hurting you by putting your FAQ on
> their CD, but if you're trying to help people, isn't Walnut Creek actually
> helping you?
I wrote my faq to help people. Giving them bad/outdated information on a
CD does not help them and makes me look stupid for providing inaccurate
information. This could be solved, of course, if Walnut creek would have
warned each FAQ author that their FAQ is about to be included on a CD and
it might bee a good idea to provide a URL to the most recent version.
This is the second time they've released the CD without doing that.
> Granted, it's very *rude* of them. And, sure, it's illegal. But
> it's not "wrong enough" to justify "su[ing] them until there's nothing
> left"!
I personnally hope this can be accomplished out of court. But a court
case might be needed to set a precendent for copyright on the Internet.
> Getting vindictive because they're rude is way out of line. It may
Actually we are asking for a change in policy because they broke the law.
Is that too much to ask?
> actually help to look at it from their point of view: Putting out a CD
> is a relatively time-consuming process. If they have to get permission
> from each individual author (and some of their CD's have thousands of
> files) they probably couldn't put out their CD's.
Oh please. Grepping all the files from RFTM.mit.edu and pasting them onto
a CD is a time-consuming process? not when compared to actually authoring
a multi-media CD that also sell for around $40. If Walnut creek found that
obeying the law to put out a CD is too much work, then they should either
find a cheaper way to do it, or direct people to local Internet service
provider where the current version of the FAQs can be found in their
natural forum.
john
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved