On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:23:16 -0700, Winfield Hill wrote:

keith wrote...

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:06:45 -0400, mc wrote:

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the
copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their
position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

I beg to differ, we did not attack Agilent's legal right to restrict the
manual information if they chose, we attacked Agilent's apparent choice
to do so.

Speak for youself. ...though I did note that you were going to hide
behind your "library" (fair use) rights. Don't get me wrong, I think
their desision was dumb, but it *was* their desision (fortunately
recinded, AIUI).

It now appears they did no more than (roughly) assert their
right to grant permission after it's sought, which we do not question.

It's more than that. You (and others) beleived that their rights were
limited by availability. On the contrary, their rights are limited by
their wishes. ...for whatever business reasons they seem to think is in
their interest.

But we do argue that it would have been unreasonable,

I'm not going to talk about "unreasonable". I don't have the information.
I *do* know that it is *THEIR* choice.

counterproductive, mean-minded and unfair to deprive the legitimate
owners of their older instruments the right to fully run and maintain
those instruments, if they were unfortunate enough not to own one of
the rare original manuals.

Oh, my; "mean-minded"! I want you to publish your books on the internet.
To do otherwise is "mean-minded". You above all here, should understand
the importance of the copyright.

--
Keith