Re: [bolger] Re: Bolger out-of-print eBooks
On 9/17/07, Stefan Probst <stefan.probst@opticom.v-nam.net> wrote:
But reading it I see that to be protected by this US Code:
Per sections 1301 and 1302, the design must be original (not a copy),
it cannot be standard, common, prevalent, or ordinary, it must be
different, it cannot be solely utilitarian and it must be 'new', that
is not have been made public for more than two years.
Section 1305, protection lasts for 10 years.
Section 1306, which says that for a design to be protected it must be
formally registered and marked with a 'circle D'. (And here is the
URL of that registry and I do not see that any PB&F boats had been
registered.)
http://www.copyright.gov/vessels/list/index.html
(By the way, this is a fun URL to look at because the links to the
application for protection forms have boat drawings to see. And I
love looking at boat drawings.)
Section 1332, the protection is not retroactive (for vessels prior to
October 28, 1998)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00001306----000-.html
motivated to sell their services as a 'custom' "one off" designer of
complex boats for private owners, or as a designer for secret military
government boats. And, less likely to sell their services for 'spec'
simple recreational boats published publicly in books and magazines.
Once the design goes public, the designer quickly loses protection, so
there is little incentive to go public.
> --- "Bruce Hallman" <bruce@...> wrote:I am not a lawyer, so I suggest reading the whole law to get the whole picture.
> > Not exactly, but close. Read the US law. I think the distinction
> > hinges on the concept that ideas deserve copyright protection,
> > but not functions.
> > With a 3D vessel shape you cannot separate function from idea.
> >
> >http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
>
> Those are many many pages. Which one do you mean?
But reading it I see that to be protected by this US Code:
Per sections 1301 and 1302, the design must be original (not a copy),
it cannot be standard, common, prevalent, or ordinary, it must be
different, it cannot be solely utilitarian and it must be 'new', that
is not have been made public for more than two years.
Section 1305, protection lasts for 10 years.
Section 1306, which says that for a design to be protected it must be
formally registered and marked with a 'circle D'. (And here is the
URL of that registry and I do not see that any PB&F boats had been
registered.)
http://www.copyright.gov/vessels/list/index.html
(By the way, this is a fun URL to look at because the links to the
application for protection forms have boat drawings to see. And I
love looking at boat drawings.)
Section 1332, the protection is not retroactive (for vessels prior to
October 28, 1998)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00001306----000-.html
> What is the catch.Well, I might guess that under this system a boat designer is more
motivated to sell their services as a 'custom' "one off" designer of
complex boats for private owners, or as a designer for secret military
government boats. And, less likely to sell their services for 'spec'
simple recreational boats published publicly in books and magazines.
Once the design goes public, the designer quickly loses protection, so
there is little incentive to go public.
--- "Bruce Hallman" <bruce@...> wrote:
So all shapes of pre-1998 designs are basically not protected.
are copyright proteced), but re-create the "3D shape" e.g. in
Free!Ship and then re-publish drawings etc. that come out of it.
So, everybody could take a Brick, draw the plans by himself, write a
bit something, call it "Frick" and publish it. Even with a note that
the shape is similar to Bolger's "Brick".
Where's the catch? ... Besides the ethical/moral issues?
Stefan
> Not exactly, but close. Read the US law. I think the distinctionThose are many many pages. Which one do you mean?
> hinges on the concept that ideas deserve copyright protection,
> but not functions.
> With a 3D vessel shape you cannot separate function from idea.
>
>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
> The 3D shape of the vessel is protected by US Code TITLE 17 CHAPTER3D shape.
> 13 § 1301 et. al. which gives 10 year of protection to properly
> registered vessel shapes from after 1998.
>
> Prior to 1998, the plans enjoyed copyright protection, but not the
So all shapes of pre-1998 designs are basically not protected.
> The paper plans (or book, etc.) are protected by a different part ofThis is what I said: Not reproduce books and/or plans (because they
> the the US copyright code.
are copyright proteced), but re-create the "3D shape" e.g. in
Free!Ship and then re-publish drawings etc. that come out of it.
So, everybody could take a Brick, draw the plans by himself, write a
bit something, call it "Frick" and publish it. Even with a note that
the shape is similar to Bolger's "Brick".
Where's the catch? ... Besides the ethical/moral issues?
Stefan
http://www.copyright.gov/vessels/list/index.html
See the above listing, interestingly, very few vessels have been
registered for protection.
See the above listing, interestingly, very few vessels have been
registered for protection.
Here is information on copywrite of hull designs from the US copywrite
office.http://www.copyright.gov/vessels/
Happy reading.
David Jost
office.http://www.copyright.gov/vessels/
Happy reading.
David Jost
On 9/17/07, Stefan Probst <stefan.probst@opticom.v-nam.net> wrote:
hinges on the concept that ideas deserve copyright protection, but not
functions. With a 3D vessel shape you cannot separate function from
idea.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
The 3D shape of the vessel is protected by US Code TITLE 17 CHAPTER
13 § 1301 et. al. which gives 10 year of protection to properly
registered vessel shapes from after 1998.
Prior to 1998, the plans enjoyed copyright protection, but not the 3D shape.
The paper plans (or book, etc.) are protected by a different part of
the the US copyright code.
> Do you mean that anybody could take a published PCB design, from aNot exactly, but close. Read the US law. I think the distinction
> book, a magazine article, etc., make a Free!Ship file, take views from
> it (like you do), get the panels developed etc. and publish this again
> under his own name ... as long as no claims are made that this is a
> design by PCB, and another name is taken for the re-modelled design?
>
> And, if somebody built a boat from such a re-published design, they
> wouldn't even need to pay Bolger royalties?
>
> Man oh man!
>
> Stefan
hinges on the concept that ideas deserve copyright protection, but not
functions. With a 3D vessel shape you cannot separate function from
idea.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
The 3D shape of the vessel is protected by US Code TITLE 17 CHAPTER
13 § 1301 et. al. which gives 10 year of protection to properly
registered vessel shapes from after 1998.
Prior to 1998, the plans enjoyed copyright protection, but not the 3D shape.
The paper plans (or book, etc.) are protected by a different part of
the the US copyright code.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Hallman" <bruce@...> wrote:
book, a magazine article, etc., make a Free!Ship file, take views from
it (like you do), get the panels developed etc. and publish this again
under his own name ... as long as no claims are made that this is a
design by PCB, and another name is taken for the re-modelled design?
And, if somebody built a boat from such a re-published design, they
wouldn't even need to pay Bolger royalties?
Man oh man!
Stefan
> Some highlights: The shapes of vessels that existed prior to 1998 areDo you mean that anybody could take a published PCB design, from a
> not protected. Vessel shapes after 1998 that are not formally
> registered also lack protection. Properly registered vessel shapes
> are protected for 10 years, afterwards they are not protected.
book, a magazine article, etc., make a Free!Ship file, take views from
it (like you do), get the panels developed etc. and publish this again
under his own name ... as long as no claims are made that this is a
design by PCB, and another name is taken for the re-modelled design?
And, if somebody built a boat from such a re-published design, they
wouldn't even need to pay Bolger royalties?
Man oh man!
Stefan
It is worth mentioning that US Copyright code applies to paper books,
and paper plans but does not apply similarly to the shapes of vessels.
See
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
for the details.
Some highlights: The shapes of vessels that existed prior to 1998 are
not protected. Vessel shapes after 1998 that are not formally
registered also lack protection. Properly registered vessel shapes
are protected for 10 years, afterwards they are not protected.
and paper plans but does not apply similarly to the shapes of vessels.
See
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17_10_13.html
for the details.
Some highlights: The shapes of vessels that existed prior to 1998 are
not protected. Vessel shapes after 1998 that are not formally
registered also lack protection. Properly registered vessel shapes
are protected for 10 years, afterwards they are not protected.
The copyright laws have gone through several major revisions, including two in the last 30 years. The original intent of the founders was, of course, to encourage invention and creation, but much has been added and amended since then.
BTW, you do not have to seek a copyright. Current law (I speak of the U.S. only). states that the copyright exists as soon as you set down the work in any form -- written, a recording, electronic storage, etc. The government does not grant copyrights. Those right exists at the time of creation and recording of the work.
What the government DOES do is RECORD the copyright. The recoding of a copyright becomes important if the copyright is infringed. A court will support your copyright if you can show that the work is yours, whether it is registered or not, but they will usually only get the offending party to cease infringing on your copyright. Usually, to seek monetary damages, the courts require the copyright to be registered.
DC
Brian Anderson <bawrytr@...> wrote:
BTW, you do not have to seek a copyright. Current law (I speak of the U.S. only). states that the copyright exists as soon as you set down the work in any form -- written, a recording, electronic storage, etc. The government does not grant copyrights. Those right exists at the time of creation and recording of the work.
What the government DOES do is RECORD the copyright. The recoding of a copyright becomes important if the copyright is infringed. A court will support your copyright if you can show that the work is yours, whether it is registered or not, but they will usually only get the offending party to cease infringing on your copyright. Usually, to seek monetary damages, the courts require the copyright to be registered.
DC
Brian Anderson <bawrytr@...> wrote:
> The state and society have an enormous interest in promoting innovation. So
> they give the individual the short to medium term profits from his or her
> innovations, so that people will be motivated to create new things. Long
> term though, as the framers of the US Constitution, and just about everybody
> else in the world thinking about this sort of thing knew, absolute control
> over an idea, text or image itself stifles innovation, and so it is in
> everybody's interest that control be limited in duration.
>
> The libertarian point of view would be that one doesn't have to seek a
> patent or copyright: the individual trades long term control over the work
> for protection under the law of his claim to the profits from it over the
> short term. It is a voluntary social contract.
>
>
>
> On 9/16/07, Mark Albanese <marka@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sep 16, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Bruce Hallman wrote:
> > > ...that therefore the interests of the public are primary over the
> > > interests of the author
> > > when the two conflict.
> >
> > Hey, Bruce, tell that to a, "Card carrying libertarian!"
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
--- David Cassidy <d.cassidy@...> wrote:
("Eigentum verpflichtet"). It is kind of a moral rule, but AFAIR it is
also used as some kind of legal principle.
... especially, if your property can be used for the public benefit,
without damaging your own property or causing too much "work" for you.
Since selling eBooks wouldn't cost PCB money, not damaging his
financial interests etc., and it was published anyway already (i.e. it
was once meant for the public already) one might apply the a.m.
principle ...
Stefan
> Copyright isn't a "privillege; it's a protection of private propertyIn Germany we have a saying something like "property obliges"
> -- a statement and proof of ownership.
("Eigentum verpflichtet"). It is kind of a moral rule, but AFAIR it is
also used as some kind of legal principle.
... especially, if your property can be used for the public benefit,
without damaging your own property or causing too much "work" for you.
Since selling eBooks wouldn't cost PCB money, not damaging his
financial interests etc., and it was published anyway already (i.e. it
was once meant for the public already) one might apply the a.m.
principle ...
Stefan
> a balance between the public right and the author's right.But mainly financial might!
On 9/16/07, Mark Albanese <marka@...> wrote:
Certainly there are different types of libertarians. I suspect that
PCB is one too, of sorts.
Regardless, what matters in the US is what the courts say, and indeed
the courts view copyright as a balance between the public right and
the author's right.
>Libertarians carry cards? <grin>
> Hey, Bruce, tell that to a, "Card carrying libertarian!"
Certainly there are different types of libertarians. I suspect that
PCB is one too, of sorts.
Regardless, what matters in the US is what the courts say, and indeed
the courts view copyright as a balance between the public right and
the author's right.
The state and society have an enormous interest in promoting innovation. So
they give the individual the short to medium term profits from his or her
innovations, so that people will be motivated to create new things. Long
term though, as the framers of the US Constitution, and just about everybody
else in the world thinking about this sort of thing knew, absolute control
over an idea, text or image itself stifles innovation, and so it is in
everybody's interest that control be limited in duration.
The libertarian point of view would be that one doesn't have to seek a
patent or copyright: the individual trades long term control over the work
for protection under the law of his claim to the profits from it over the
short term. It is a voluntary social contract.
they give the individual the short to medium term profits from his or her
innovations, so that people will be motivated to create new things. Long
term though, as the framers of the US Constitution, and just about everybody
else in the world thinking about this sort of thing knew, absolute control
over an idea, text or image itself stifles innovation, and so it is in
everybody's interest that control be limited in duration.
The libertarian point of view would be that one doesn't have to seek a
patent or copyright: the individual trades long term control over the work
for protection under the law of his claim to the profits from it over the
short term. It is a voluntary social contract.
On 9/16/07, Mark Albanese <marka@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 16, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Bruce Hallman wrote:
> > ...that therefore the interests of the public are primary over the
> > interests of the author
> > when the two conflict.
>
> Hey, Bruce, tell that to a, "Card carrying libertarian!"
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
On Sep 16, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Bruce Hallman wrote:
> ...that therefore the interests of the public are primary over theHey, Bruce, tell that to a, "Card carrying libertarian!"
> interests of the author
> when the two conflict.
On 9/16/07, David Cassidy <d.cassidy@...> wrote:
copyright is not so much a protection of 'private property' as an
encouragement to promote creativity for the public good; by giving
authors the exclusive right (for limited time) to use their writings
and discoveries.
U.S. courts have interpreted this clause of the Constitution to say
that the ultimate purpose of copyrights is to encourage the production
of creative works for the public benefit, and that therefore the
interests of the public are primary over the interests of the author
when the two conflict.
>Actually, in the United States Constitution at least (Article 1.8.8),
> Copyright isn't a "privilege; it's a protection of private property --
> a statement and proof of ownership.
copyright is not so much a protection of 'private property' as an
encouragement to promote creativity for the public good; by giving
authors the exclusive right (for limited time) to use their writings
and discoveries.
U.S. courts have interpreted this clause of the Constitution to say
that the ultimate purpose of copyrights is to encourage the production
of creative works for the public benefit, and that therefore the
interests of the public are primary over the interests of the author
when the two conflict.
Someone might try asking Jonathan Eaton at International Marine
Publishing (207) 236-4837.
There is a decent chance that they might republish those books in a
second edition if they were to consider that there was a sufficient
demand. Evidence of the demand, I think, is the fact that the used
editions when sold at auction sell so high.
Publishing (207) 236-4837.
There is a decent chance that they might republish those books in a
second edition if they were to consider that there was a sufficient
demand. Evidence of the demand, I think, is the fact that the used
editions when sold at auction sell so high.
> > I've always thought that in return for the privilege of holdingLOL -- Yes, I would assume that an unpopular view, especially among those who hold copyrights to intellectual property (such as books). Copyright isn't a "privillege; it's a protection of private property -- a statement and proof of ownership.
> > copyright over a publication, an author should have an obligation to
> > make it available. If he or she doesn't, others should be able to re-
> > publish. It's not a popular view...
If you owned a boat that you used in a business of giving rides for money, then decided to stop doing that and put your boat into storage, should I have the right to come and take it and use it? -- After all, even though it belongs to you, you aren't using it.
Same thing.
David C
--- "GarthAB" <garth@...> wrote:
small fraction of the revenue in return. If I had a library next to
me, I'd try it by myself, to make an eBook out of one of his books,
for my own use (i.e. legally ok), and to see how much work it would
take....
Cheers,
Stefan
> But I suspect that reprinting his books atThis is what I meant: Somebody else could do it for him, and get a
> this point is low on his "good-use-of-my-time" list.
small fraction of the revenue in return. If I had a library next to
me, I'd try it by myself, to make an eBook out of one of his books,
for my own use (i.e. legally ok), and to see how much work it would
take....
Cheers,
Stefan
Most book contracts give a publisher permission to publish a book (and
the author retains copyright ownership), and it remains in force as
long as the publisher keeps the book in print and keeps selling it.
Once a book goes formally out of print, the rights that had been
temporarily licensed to a publisher revert to the author. I'd guess
that all rights have reverted to PCB, unless some unscrupulous
publisher had him completely sign away his copyright ownership in a
contract long ago. So he can choose to republish them if he wishes. Up
until a few years ago, he would've needed to find a publisher willing
to invest in them. Now, with digital archiving and print-on-demand
technologies, it's a much less capital-intensive process to bring an
old book back into print. But I suspect that reprinting his books at
this point is low on his "good-use-of-my-time" list.
It's a shame -- we all want more and more from him, as he's able to
give less and less.
Garth
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson"
<howardstephenson@...> wrote:
the author retains copyright ownership), and it remains in force as
long as the publisher keeps the book in print and keeps selling it.
Once a book goes formally out of print, the rights that had been
temporarily licensed to a publisher revert to the author. I'd guess
that all rights have reverted to PCB, unless some unscrupulous
publisher had him completely sign away his copyright ownership in a
contract long ago. So he can choose to republish them if he wishes. Up
until a few years ago, he would've needed to find a publisher willing
to invest in them. Now, with digital archiving and print-on-demand
technologies, it's a much less capital-intensive process to bring an
old book back into print. But I suspect that reprinting his books at
this point is low on his "good-use-of-my-time" list.
It's a shame -- we all want more and more from him, as he's able to
give less and less.
Garth
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson"
<howardstephenson@...> wrote:
>
> No doubt true, but the author and copyright-holder would have had a
> contract with the publisher that quite likely he is still bound to.
>
> I've always thought that in return for the privilege of holding
> copyright over a publication, an author should have an obligation to
> make it available. If he or she doesn't, others should be able to re-
> publish. It's not a popular view...
>
> Howard
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Cassidy <d.cassidy@> wrote:
> >
> > The only person/entity who has any say is the current holder of the
> copyright.
>
No doubt true, but the author and copyright-holder would have had a
contract with the publisher that quite likely he is still bound to.
I've always thought that in return for the privilege of holding
copyright over a publication, an author should have an obligation to
make it available. If he or she doesn't, others should be able to re-
publish. It's not a popular view...
Howard
contract with the publisher that quite likely he is still bound to.
I've always thought that in return for the privilege of holding
copyright over a publication, an author should have an obligation to
make it available. If he or she doesn't, others should be able to re-
publish. It's not a popular view...
Howard
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Cassidy <d.cassidy@...> wrote:
>
> The only person/entity who has any say is the current holder of the
copyright.
The only person/entity who has any say is the current holder of the copyright.
I would assume that would be PB himself (though, I don't have any of the books in front of me right now, so I can't verify that, but most authors keep their own copyrights on their creations).
DC
---- Stefan Probst <stefan.probst@opticom.v-nam.net> wrote:
I would assume that would be PB himself (though, I don't have any of the books in front of me right now, so I can't verify that, but most authors keep their own copyrights on their creations).
DC
---- Stefan Probst <stefan.probst@opticom.v-nam.net> wrote:
> --- "oarmandt" <oarman89@...> wrote:
> >
> > The original publisher may have some say in this matter,
> > despite what PB&F would like to do.
>
> True. So give him some share too. The eBook wouldn't be a competition
> to other sales, so everybody only would win.
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
--- "oarmandt" <oarman89@...> wrote:
to other sales, so everybody only would win.
Stefan
>True. So give him some share too. The eBook wouldn't be a competition
> The original publisher may have some say in this matter,
> despite what PB&F would like to do.
to other sales, so everybody only would win.
Stefan
The original publisher may have some say in this matter, despite what
PB&F would like to do.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@...>
wrote:
PB&F would like to do.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@...>
wrote:
>
> They are all wonderful works, and I won't surrender mine ;-)
>
> I do hope he's not one of those who burn all their papers. Further,
> I hope there are back-up copies.
>
> Oh dear, grim topics all these.
>
> Graeme
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Harry James <welshman@> wrote:
> >
> > I have caught hints that Mr Bolger would like to update his
> thoughts on
> > the older books. His thinking has changed over the years ands
> perhaps he
> > would like to include the changed thinking in an updated version.
> I have
> > no direct evidence of this except maybe a comment on an interview
> > somewhere that he wanted to re-edit them. I personally think
> that
> > would be a shame, they are what they are, very readable insights
> into
> > his thinking at the time. I haul them out and re read them just
> like I
> > do my CS Forester. The only difference is Forester is still in
> print.
>
> > Stefan Probst wrote:
> > > Catchy Subject?
> > >
> > > Fairly simple to do, would make everybody happy, but I am afraid
> will
> > > get the "no no" from the Master:
> > >
> > > Scan his out-of-print books (i.e. no lost sales revenue), and
> create
> > > them as eBook (i.e. e.g. as .pdf version). Definitely some work,
> but
> > > doable - one chapter at a time ... and if you do it in a
> > > low-labour-cost country, then you could even hire people to do
> it.
> > >
> > > Then sell them on www.lulu.com, at whatever price is reasonable.
>
They are all wonderful works, and I won't surrender mine ;-)
I do hope he's not one of those who burn all their papers. Further,
I hope there are back-up copies.
Oh dear, grim topics all these.
Graeme
I do hope he's not one of those who burn all their papers. Further,
I hope there are back-up copies.
Oh dear, grim topics all these.
Graeme
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Harry James <welshman@...> wrote:
>
> I have caught hints that Mr Bolger would like to update his
thoughts on
> the older books. His thinking has changed over the years ands
perhaps he
> would like to include the changed thinking in an updated version.
I have
> no direct evidence of this except maybe a comment on an interview
> somewhere that he wanted to re-edit them. I personally think
that
> would be a shame, they are what they are, very readable insights
into
> his thinking at the time. I haul them out and re read them just
like I
> do my CS Forester. The only difference is Forester is still in
print.
> Stefan Probst wrote:
> > Catchy Subject?
> >
> > Fairly simple to do, would make everybody happy, but I am afraid
will
> > get the "no no" from the Master:
> >
> > Scan his out-of-print books (i.e. no lost sales revenue), and
create
> > them as eBook (i.e. e.g. as .pdf version). Definitely some work,
but
> > doable - one chapter at a time ... and if you do it in a
> > low-labour-cost country, then you could even hire people to do
it.
> >
> > Then sell them on www.lulu.com, at whatever price is reasonable.
I have caught hints that Mr Bolger would like to update his thoughts on
the older books. His thinking has changed over the years ands perhaps he
would like to include the changed thinking in an updated version. I have
no direct evidence of this except maybe a comment on an interview
somewhere that he wanted to re-edit them. I personally think that
would be a shame, they are what they are, very readable insights into
his thinking at the time. I haul them out and re read them just like I
do my CS Forester. The only difference is Forester is still in print.
HJ
Stefan Probst wrote:
the older books. His thinking has changed over the years ands perhaps he
would like to include the changed thinking in an updated version. I have
no direct evidence of this except maybe a comment on an interview
somewhere that he wanted to re-edit them. I personally think that
would be a shame, they are what they are, very readable insights into
his thinking at the time. I haul them out and re read them just like I
do my CS Forester. The only difference is Forester is still in print.
HJ
Stefan Probst wrote:
> Catchy Subject?
>
> Fairly simple to do, would make everybody happy, but I am afraid will
> get the "no no" from the Master:
>
> Scan his out-of-print books (i.e. no lost sales revenue), and create
> them as eBook (i.e. e.g. as .pdf version). Definitely some work, but
> doable - one chapter at a time ... and if you do it in a
> low-labour-cost country, then you could even hire people to do it.
>
> Then sell them on www.lulu.com, at whatever price is reasonable.
>
> Lulu takes 20%/25%, a further small portion to the guy who scanned, a
> further small portion to the one who administers the Lulu site (could
> be the same guy). Leaves a good part for PB&F, for not doing anything,
> and not hurting any other sales. In fact, each sold book is an
> advertising for plans.
>
> In addition, Lulu might even be permitted to print books from the .pdf
> file, one at a time, for each buyer who wants a printed version.
> Again: the margin (Selling price minus printing cost) goes to a big
> part to PB&F.
>
> What would they say?
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Catchy Subject?
Fairly simple to do, would make everybody happy, but I am afraid will
get the "no no" from the Master:
Scan his out-of-print books (i.e. no lost sales revenue), and create
them as eBook (i.e. e.g. as .pdf version). Definitely some work, but
doable - one chapter at a time ... and if you do it in a
low-labour-cost country, then you could even hire people to do it.
Then sell them on www.lulu.com, at whatever price is reasonable.
Lulu takes 20%/25%, a further small portion to the guy who scanned, a
further small portion to the one who administers the Lulu site (could
be the same guy). Leaves a good part for PB&F, for not doing anything,
and not hurting any other sales. In fact, each sold book is an
advertising for plans.
In addition, Lulu might even be permitted to print books from the .pdf
file, one at a time, for each buyer who wants a printed version.
Again: the margin (Selling price minus printing cost) goes to a big
part to PB&F.
What would they say?
Cheers,
Stefan
Fairly simple to do, would make everybody happy, but I am afraid will
get the "no no" from the Master:
Scan his out-of-print books (i.e. no lost sales revenue), and create
them as eBook (i.e. e.g. as .pdf version). Definitely some work, but
doable - one chapter at a time ... and if you do it in a
low-labour-cost country, then you could even hire people to do it.
Then sell them on www.lulu.com, at whatever price is reasonable.
Lulu takes 20%/25%, a further small portion to the guy who scanned, a
further small portion to the one who administers the Lulu site (could
be the same guy). Leaves a good part for PB&F, for not doing anything,
and not hurting any other sales. In fact, each sold book is an
advertising for plans.
In addition, Lulu might even be permitted to print books from the .pdf
file, one at a time, for each buyer who wants a printed version.
Again: the margin (Selling price minus printing cost) goes to a big
part to PB&F.
What would they say?
Cheers,
Stefan