Return-Path: owner-LDP-L@cornell.edu
Received: from listproc.mail.cornell.edu (LISTPROC.MAIL.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.56.14]) by keos.cs.Helsinki.FI (8.6.10/H46) with ESMTP id DAA02324 for <LARS.WIRZENIUS@CS.HELSINKI.FI>; Mon, 10 Jul 1995 03:23:32 +0300
Received: from localhost.mail.cornell.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA04497; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:21:06 -0400
Received: from cornell.edu (cornell.edu [132.236.56.6]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA04443 for <LDP-L@listproc.mail.cornell.edu>; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:20:56 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA14906 for LDP-L@listproc.mail.cornell.edu; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:08 -0400
Received: from simon.cs.cornell.edu (SIMON.CS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.154.10]) by cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA14902 for <LDP-L@cornell.edu>; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:08 -0400
Received: from cloyd.cs.cornell.edu (CLOYD.CS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.227.15]) by simon.cs.cornell.edu (8.6.10/R1.01) with ESMTP id UAA22996 for <LDP-L@cornell.edu>; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:07 -0400
Received: from thokk.cs.cornell.edu (THOKK.CS.CORNELL.EDU [128.84.254.9]) by cloyd.cs.cornell.edu (8.6.10/M1.6) with ESMTP id UAA05120 for <LDP-L@cornell.edu>; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:06 -0400
Received: (mdw@localhost) by thokk.cs.cornell.edu (8.6.10/C1.3) id UAA00465 for LDP-L@cornell.edu; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:04 -0400
Message-Id: <199507100023.UAA00465@thokk.cs.cornell.edu>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 1995 20:23:04 EDT
Reply-To: LDP-L@cornell.edu
Sender: owner-LDP-L@cornell.edu
From: mdw@CS.CORNELL.EDU (Matt Welsh)
To: Linux Documentation Project writers  <LDP-L@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Yggdrasil and LDP
X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified) 
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.0 10/31/90)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2(a) -- ListProcessor by CREN
Content-Length: 1996
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Greenfie <greenfie@gauss.rutgers.edu> writes:
> Matt, if I recall in addition to writing the I&GS "free" manual, you also
> have a more traditional published book with a more traditional copyright,
> correct?  Did you choose the copyright scheme because of pressure from the
> publisher?  

No, it was understood from that start that this would be the case. I didn't
think that the O'Reilly book needed to be "free", especially since I
planned to keep the I&GS up-to-date.

> After all, I assume (and hope!) that you're getting royalties,
> which is exactly what Yggdrasil is offering, in exchange for changing a
> copyright to be more in line with their policy as a company.

That is one way of looking at it. However, my own dealings with
Yggdrasil and RMS have made me sour about the issue; they seem to
be "bullying" us into changing our copyrights, and this is the latest
move on their part. 

> I was never overly happy with the copyright scheme.  I probably will change
> mine.  Will it be specifically because of this?  Well, no, but this will
> make me take some sort of action.  (Not to mention I hope to have a new
> version out in August.  I may as well put a new copyright on it by then.)

I think it's important to stand up for what you believe in. I happen
to believe in vendors who don't bully the volunteers around while holding
money over their heads. Then again, I don't depend on Yggdrasil's
donation. It's nice to have, yes, but it doesn't change my standard of
living! :)

I'm almost at the point where I'd refuse to change the copyright on
principle---if we allow people like Yggdrasil to tell us how we should
be licensing our books, what next? Will they require us to include
Yggdrasil-specific information, or plugs for their product? They 
never "negotiated" a "contract" with us. They're treating us like
pets, in a way, holding a treat over us so we'll jump through hoops.
I think we deserve more respect than that, and Yggdrasil does not
respect our position. 

mdw
