From: Noel W. <noe...@ya...> - 2004-08-26 09:39:53
|
Ok, on further reflection I am back to the initial position of reserving the compilation copyright. This seems fairly minor but at least gives the publisher some protection. Hopefully we won't need it and can revert to a totally free position later. To do this requires: - defining CompilationCopyright Also we should address: - the SchematicsEditorsGroup needs some kind of charter: - what is the time limit on voting - what quorum is needed for a decision This strikes me as really tedious stuff - Royalties. I really don't want to be involved in creating a non-profit at this point in time. Some kind of note should do. Noel ===== Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com AIM: noelhwelsh __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail |
From: Anton v. S. <an...@ap...> - 2004-08-26 15:06:34
|
> Ok, on further reflection I am back to the initial position > of reserving the compilation copyright. This seems fairly > minor but at least gives the publisher some protection. > Hopefully we won't need it and can revert to a totally free > position later. Agreed. > To do this requires: > > - defining CompilationCopyright I'll take a stab at this today. > Also we should address: > > - the SchematicsEditorsGroup needs some kind of charter: > - what is the time limit on voting > - what quorum is needed for a decision > > This strikes me as really tedious stuff I wonder if we could find an off-the-shelf (and really simple) charter. Making one up from scratch definitely sounds tedious (and wheel-reinventing). > - Royalties. I really don't want to be involved in > creating a non-profit at this point in time. Some > kind of note should do. Agreed. I'll try to come up with something, unless someone else wants to try. Anton |
From: Noel W. <noe...@ya...> - 2004-08-26 15:34:32
|
--- Anton van Straaten <an...@ap...> wrote: > I'll take a stab at this today. Great. Thanks. > I wonder if we could find an off-the-shelf (and really > simple) charter. > Making one up from scratch definitely sounds tedious (and > wheel-reinventing). Agreed. I will attempt to write something up based on the Apache Foundation. E.g.: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > Agreed. I'll try to come up with something, unless > someone else wants to try. If I beat you to it I'll do it. Noel ===== Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com AIM: noelhwelsh __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail |
From: Noel W. <noe...@ya...> - 2004-08-26 16:56:26
|
--- Anton van Straaten <an...@ap...> wrote: > Agreed. I'll try to come up with something, unless > someone else wants to > try. http://schemecookbook.org/Cookbook/CookbookFAQ Noel ===== Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com AIM: noelhwelsh __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail |
From: Tony Garnock-J. <to...@ls...> - 2004-08-26 15:52:03
|
Noel Welsh wrote: > - Royalties. I really don't want to be involved in > creating a non-profit at this point in time. Some > kind > of note should do. What if there were no royalties and it simply made the book slightly cheaper to buy? Tony |
From: Noel W. <noe...@ya...> - 2004-08-26 16:07:13
|
--- Tony Garnock-Jones <to...@ls...> wrote: > What if there were no royalties and it simply made the > book slightly cheaper to buy? I was thinking waiving royalties or taking a reduced rate is one of the bargaining chips we could use. Passing on the price reduction to the consumer would be nice but I think it is premature to give up this right. I think the usual royalty rate is 10% of the cover price of the book so on a tech book it would be about $2-3, which is nice but not huge. Noel ===== Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com AIM: noelhwelsh __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
From: Tony Garnock-J. <to...@ls...> - 2004-08-26 16:09:47
|
It makes for good advertising, besides being a tangible benefit to the consumer - a paragraph on the cover "The authors of this work have waived royalties to bring /better value/ to /you/, the consumer! Share And Enjoy!" ;-) Noel Welsh wrote: > --- Tony Garnock-Jones <to...@ls...> wrote: > > >>What if there were no royalties and it simply made the >>book slightly cheaper to buy? > > > I was thinking waiving royalties or taking a reduced rate > is one of the bargaining chips we could use. Passing on > the price reduction to the consumer would be nice but I > think it is premature to give up this right. I think the > usual royalty rate is 10% of the cover price of the book so > on a tech book it would be about $2-3, which is nice but > not huge. > > Noel > > ===== > Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com > AIM: noelhwelsh > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com |
From: MJ R. <mj...@ds...> - 2004-08-26 16:39:43
|
On 2004-08-26 10:39:45 +0100 Noel Welsh <noe...@ya...> wrote: > Ok, on further reflection I am back to the initial position > of reserving the compilation copyright. Can you do that without copyright assignments from the contributors? > This seems fairly > minor but at least gives the publisher some protection. [...] Fairly minor, but makes the cookbook useless for debian, doesn't it? :-/ -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing |
From: Anton v. S. <an...@ap...> - 2004-08-26 18:23:53
|
MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-08-26 10:39:45 +0100 Noel Welsh <noe...@ya...> wrote: > > > Ok, on further reflection I am back to the initial position > > of reserving the compilation copyright. > > Can you do that without copyright assignments from the contributors? The assignment will be on the registration page - by signing up, contributors will agree to two different points: (1) that individual contributions are licensed under LGPL; and (2) that rights to any compilation based on the classification information are assigned to the SchematicsEditorsGroup. > > This seems fairly > > minor but at least gives the publisher some protection. [...] > > Fairly minor, but makes the cookbook useless for debian, doesn't it? > :-/ Just like the Python cookbook. On the plus side, I can't easily imagine a situation in which you'd type "apt-get install foo" and have it come back and say that it can't do it because foo depends on the Schematics Cookbook. Unless foo is an artificially intelligent Scheme programmer. :-) BTW, I think that if any actual code library arises from the Cookbook, i.e. one which can usefully be used in PLT simply by using "require" for the appropriate module, then we should make that library LGPL in its entirety. That will allow the library to be included in free software collections. Anton |
From: Anton v. S. <an...@ap...> - 2004-08-28 08:34:45
|
I've made some changes to the CopyRight page to specify that contributors should only contribute material which they have a legal right to contribute. I adapted language from Wikipedia for that. I've also added the CompilationCopyright. IMO, we're OK for a beta announcement now. It might be best to wait until Monday to do that. Anton |
From: Brent F. <bfu...@de...> - 2004-08-29 23:28:26
|
On 2004-08-28 01:36:35 -0700 Anton van Straaten <an...@ap...> wrote: > I've made some changes to the CopyRight page to specify that > contributors > should only contribute material which they have a legal right to > contribute. > I adapted language from Wikipedia for that. I just slurped this up for the Erlang Cookbook as well. Would you mind putting the LGPL and other "boilerplate" type material in the Main namespace, so I could just refer to it as such? There's even less possibility of this massively incomplete item ever becoming a printed book, but might as well lay a common groundwork, so everything is nice and consistent. Thanks, -Brent |