Excelsior the book

There's nothing at all "disproportionate" about the fact that J0hn left; my guess is that up until now, he had some vague trust that ILXors weren't about to do something dumb like this, and now --- in whatever tiny, doesn't-make-a-difference way --- he's been reminded that he can't trust that at all.

One final thing: this argument about exactly how much harm it does is ridiculous and beside the point. Each of us has copyright on what we write here. It's up to each of us to decide how we feel about what happens to our words, and we don't have to defend our reactions to anyone else.

Well yeah, obviously (that's part of what makes the analogy). No one's denying Mark didn't have copyright here, and I pointed out on the Moderator Request Forum that CafePress is known to respond quickly to "X doesn't have copyright to Y" complaints. But that doesn't actually sound like the substance of peoples' complaints.

Also, Tep, your Jay-Z analogy refutation, if I understand it, is off; copyright protection isn't just about sellable works you originally intended to sell -- it's about anything you created that happens to be sellable.

Chris, you're confusing an argument about legality, which I have no interest in, with the argument I'm actually participating in.

J0hn D, don't flee...the book won't happen now, it's all good...

x-post

I can't agree that it sets a precedent, because I can't believe it's the first time. The first time we know about it? Seems like it. The first time it's happened to ILX specifically? Could be. (Although wasn't there something about an ILB thread being reprinted in a newspaper? I could be misremembering.)

People keep bringing up J0hn as though his threat to leave were the whole issue here, and for the most part I haven't talked about that at all -- it's his choice, and I don't see why anything I'd say would make any difference. I started out trying just to figure out what, exactly, people were uncomfortable with or angry about. If we want to set a precedent, shouldn't it to make it clear what the community's okay with and what it isn't?

(Every time I hit Submit there are new posts! I may never see any of you again.)

ost of x-posts. And Tep, much as I like you I have to say fuckyou to the idea that you can label someone's objections to stuff like this "silly." This is like shouting-out-of-cars all over again: you can't do rights-infringing shit to people and then call them crybabies when they'd prefer you not to.

I was on the other side for shouting-out-of-cars, though. (Well, one of the other sides ... oh, let's not bring it all back up.)

You can object to my using the word "silly," and that's fine, but c'mon, we don't need to get into the "you have the right to do X and I have the right to think Y about you doing X, which triggers your right to think Z about my actually saying Y about your X..." Somebody started singing it not knowing what it was, etc.

That's not the sum of my argument, but sure, a CafePress isn't inherently a book the way something published by a professional publisher is. A publisher might use CafePress, but when I put my cookbook through there, for instance, it doesn't have an ISBN number, it can't be ordered by anyone not looking for it, it isn't listed on Amazon, it can't be special-ordered somewhere, etc., etc.

I don't know if I'd say it's the same as the difference between a mix CD and a commercially produced CD, but it's a major difference. If there wasn't, I'd be a published cookbook author.

summarize a book in 25 words, I think. But the diff here is that its an ilxor, on the other hand, the newspaper person should also know abt copyright.

xpost ISBN and Amazon don't get to decide what a "book" is or not! Many of my favorite books don't have ISBN's and aren't on Amazon, that's the whole idea behind "small press"! And I'm pretty sure most bookstores won't special order something that doesn't have an ISBN anyway.

Lemme suggest something better: how about ILX regulars just print out threads they think are funny to keep for themselves? It's not difficult.

(Chris, for heaven's sake, I'm both an author and an editor in the small press. We aren't going to have an argue about the innate essence of bookness. You can feel free to alone.)

'Webboard comments have ranged from anti-European ("More tastelessness and idiocy from across the Atlantic") to mildly amused ("Somebody had to say it") to vehement agreement ("George W. Bush should die in a hotel fire in Birmingham, wrapped in sheets gritty with Mr Kipling crumbs") since the incident.'

All three comments, unattributed, came from one ILM thread, and the third is mine... But it's a parody paraphrase of a comment Morrissey himself made about Brett Anderson. So, if the lawyers had their way, we could sue Pitchfork, Morrissey could sue me, Bush could join him in a class action, Brett Anderson could sue Morrissey, Bush could invade Highgate, Ned could lock every thread on ILM, and so on and so on. Only the lawyers would benefit, and in the end only three vultures would be left alive on earth. (Cue TAFKAJD to say 'Momus, don't be disrespecting vultures. They are noble animals.')

*This is not to say I don't think some of you have very valid arguments - it IS, rather, to say that he said if people said no that he'd get rid of it, people have said no, and now he'll get rid of it. Why waste the time and energy on something which has practically already been solved?

Thread's done, make way for the people to comment on the thread now.