begin quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] as of Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 05:42:19PM -0800: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 03:58:19PM -0800, Stewart Stremler wrote: > > Um, no, the reason copyright was "necessary" was because printing was > > CHEAP, not because it was expensive. > > Are you sure?
Yup. > A printer who 'steals' another printer's work might have > *cheaper* expenses but is it really *cheap*? By any scale that matters, yes. > They must pay for the paper for *each* book. They must set the press for > *each* page. Labor costs, materials costs, on and on. Compared to the alternative at the time? It was cheap. > Doesn't look cheap to me. That's 'cuz you're prejudiced. -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
