> Theoretically, you are right, but consider this. > Print publisher have to change the products only when they reprint it.
Partially due, I believe, to the difficulty in recalling X books, destroying them, reprinting, and redistributing. The cost alone would kill most small companies. > PDF publishers have to change the products always. I would consider > "printed" a PDF product in distribution, so why a PDF publisher have to > change a "printed product"? You would be one of the few that consider a PDF a 'printed' product. While PDF is starting to catch on more and more, most of the gamers I know consider PDF to be the first sign that a company doesn't really have the funds to exist. It denotes 'fan boy' companies to most of the people I know. Its fine, however, if you have both printed and PDF.. that seems to be an acceptable format.. giving the real gamer a paper product to fondle, and an electronic copy to send to work, etc. > You can say: "Because it is easier to change an electronic product than a > printed one". > Fair, but you have to consider that PDF companies are smaller than print > companies and the efforts in changing the products should be "scaled". It is scaled.. I have yet to hear of a company that produces PDF only having to recall or destroy burned CD's that their PDF appears on. And I believe you have 30 days to make the change in your PDF.. that should be plenty of time for anyone to sit down and make minor changes. In the end, both cases reflect the responsibility of the publisher, be it a PDF or paper publisher. Simply, it is just one more expense to be considered when entering the publishing arena. _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
