Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ in lists reply, because I really need a wide range of, possibly > authoritative, opinions on this damned book! ] > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 12:48:45AM -0600, J.B. Nicholson-Owens wrote: > > So, if I understand O'Reilly's new view correctly, I could build a > > business around selling printed versions of the content in > > O'Reilly books under this license so long as each copy of my books > > also contains material from "several other sources"? So, for > > example, hardcopies of Alice In Wonderland plus this O'Reilly book > > is okay, but hardcopies of this O'Reilly book alone is not. > > Absolutely right.
Well, what about a hardcopy of the O'Reilly book plus a one-sentence dedication to my dog? To be more realistic, how about the statement "Printed 2002 by FooBar Inc". It seems that allowing aggregate for-profit distribution is the same as allowing for-profit distribution of the original. It seems to be a nonsense restriction, and makes me think that the O'Reilly people haven't quite thought through the implications. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
