Subject: RE: Differing IP laws
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 15:24:31 -0400

 Mon, 24 Apr 2000 15:24:31 -0400

Eduardo Basterrechea wrote:
> >It is apparent that you are not familiar with O'Reilly's line of books,
> >or, presumably, the topics they cover.  Most of them are not obsolete,
> >even in part, in less than a few years, and most of them are still
> >valuable reading (though obsolete in part) ten years later.
> >
> I'm not speaking about O'Really books, I,m speaking of books in general,
> specially technical books

Kragen nailed it.  First of all the name is "O'Reilly".  Virtually all
of their books are technical.  The vast majority are computer related.
A substantial fraction are considered the classic references in their
subjects.  For these reasons and more O'Reilly is generally accepted as
the top publisher of software-related references

Secondly the subject at issue is the pirating of O'Reilly books on a
Russian website.  Your position is that the books go out of date, so it
is up to the publisher to come out with new releases and provide value
for the money.  However this publisher has repeatedly demonstrated that
you can write references which explain fundamental concepts that will
remain relevant even as the details of the cool technology move on.  So
even out of date editions are extremely useful as current references.

> >This is even more true of more fundamental books; Addison-Wesley
> >published a number of books on computer science during the 1960s and
> >1970s that are obsolete in only a few small ways today.
> >
> And, You donīt think I would be better to update this books or you prefer to
> read a lot of new books saying the same message?

I prefer to have a good classic that I trust over having a lot of
current trash.

I prefer to have the original unaltered with cosmetic "updates" done
for no good reason than to make the material "current".  Of course
technical work often needs to be updated when the area moves on.  But
a surprising fraction of the time a well-written reference will age