Subject: RE: Differing IP laws
From: "Eduardo Basterrechea" <ebaste@eitig.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 20:53:20 +0200

>    Eduardo> Editors must improve their technical books; they have to
>    Eduardo> change their idea about the books. A technical book is
>    Eduardo> obsolete in a few months, or a year(not completely but in
>    Eduardo> part).
>
>Surely you jest.  My trusty copy of the Xlib Programmer's Guide (from
>O'Reilly, who else?) says "for Version 11, Release 4" on the cover.
>It was printed in late 1991.
>

Yeah, but what do you think of the idea I presented? 1991, was very long
time ago (in Internet time). Don't you think it's a better idea?

>Like a beloved vinyl record album, I will eventually have to replace
>it because the ink has rubbed off most of the pages; or perhaps
>because it's time to start teaching my daughter, and we can share a
>fresh copy until she's ready to hack on her own.
>




>The kind of technical books O'Reilly publishes need not become
>obsolete for a decade or more.
>

Some of the books in the russian site are obsolete (in O'Really site)


>    Eduardo> They should develop a new product and a part of the
>    Eduardo> product is the book. They should develop web pages about
>    Eduardo> the book, answer reader's questions, enhance the contents
>    Eduardo> with the help of the readers...and of course publish the
>    Eduardo> book.  They should charge the use of the resources.
>
>I think this is hopeless.  That is, this is definitely a business
>opportunity; what I think is hopeless is for publishers to apply their
>experience and connections to it.  Educators and authors have the
>comparative advantage in the kind of activity you point out;
>publishers do not.  And those web pages, FAQs, enhanced contents, etc
>are all unlikely to generate revenue; they don't make up for a bad book.
>

There's a lot of bad books in the market, why we need to edit new books in a
subject if we could improve one. I think that books may evolution, not be a
milestone.

>It may be that educators and authors are sufficiently inept at running
>businesses that ex-publishers will end up dominating that niche, but I
>wouldn't bet on it.  Publishers will have to do, somehow, what they've
>always done: make the decisions about which authors get financing, and
>which not; supply the chosen authors with editorial and other
>assistance; and market the product.  But publishers who spend too
>much on enhancing ancillary materials for bad books will be throwing
>money down an e-hole.
>
>I'll hazard a guess that what will happen is not that publishers will
>become training/educational consultants, but that those that flourish
>over the next decades will be those that have an eye for the classics
>that people will be willing to pay extra for for a polished, hardware
>version.
>
>--

Thanks for your coments

>University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
>Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
>_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
>What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."