Brad Knowles writes: > giving them some reasonable protection against loss of revenue due > to the material being freely available in an electronic form.
You may not call that proprietary, but that's precisely the definition of "proprietary" that one arrives at when observing the behavior of non-profit organizations like the IEEE and the ISO. I don't have an objection to proprietary material, and undoubtedly it's well-worth the nominal cost in this case. I don't even have a problem with the reference in the context of a forum where most of the advice is given for free (in any sense you choose). I just think the fact that some rights are reserved should be mentioned when you refer to it. Since you didn't, I took the liberty of doing so in my own style.<wink> ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
