cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
[cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...]
- From: "Luis Villa" <luis AT tieguy.org>
- To: "Javier Candeira" <javier AT candeira.com>, "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...]
- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:15:05 -0400
This thread (rather, this complete rehash of things which have been
discussed over and over again) is getting terribly repetitive and
dull. Can it end? Nothing that has been said since very early in the
thread has been new for some years now.
Better yet, can there be a cc-licenses-offtopic or something similar
that such discussions can preemptively be shunted to when they get
repetitive, or of interest only to a few? I find that generally the
signal-to-noise ratio on this list is quite bad, and I have a very
high tolerance for such things. Maybe a cc-licenses-ot, or just a
general policy of actively encouraging such discussions to move
off-list, would help that.
Luis
On 3/22/07, Javier Candeira <javier AT candeira.com> wrote:
Kevin Phillips (home) wrote:
>> Writers do not really have such alternatives, as a body
>> of text is a body of text is body of test...
>
> Audio books are a good possibility, or other alternative ways to deliver the
> "text".
And as anyone can make an audiobook off a by-nc-sa novel, the only
difference with by-sa is that -nc only allows the novelist to sell the
audiobook.
>> Once you've read
>> something, you've read it; if it is very good, you might wish to read
>> it again, but are unlikely to wish to read it every day or hang it on
>> your wall.
>> S.M.
>
> ok. So you need to come to my house and explain to my fiancee why she
> doesn't actually need to buy all of Cory Doctorow's books because he has
> them online for free download. :) She loves books, likes to carry them
> around and read them on trains, swap them with friends. She's an active
> bookmoocher and doesn't seem to be so unique in this regard.
Market for novelists is a bit bigger when you not only consider the nutters.
> It's apparently also essential to have more than one version of a book,
> especially limited edition shiny covered highly-stroke'able expensive ones!
> :) ...prefereably signed...
Of course. And even translations into languages you don't understand. It's
the covers, you know? Still, we nutters ('us nutters'?) are a limited
market. Most readers pick up whatever cheap paperback edition.
-- j
_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
-
[cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...],
Luis Villa, 03/22/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], Mike Linksvayer, 03/22/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], drew Roberts, 03/22/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], Javier Candeira, 03/23/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], Antoine, 03/23/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -otlist? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], Kevin Phillips (home), 03/23/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -ot list? [was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...], Terry Hancock, 03/24/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.