www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Foundation relationships with publishing bodies
Date Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:38:43 GMT
I really don't think that this practice by Packt is OK at all, but they do
seem completely immune to feedback on this matter.  Their business model is
apparently to skim content and not give attribution.  This isn't illegal,
but it is pretty unethical.

My own approach has been to leave reviews where they are trying to sell
this particular book.  That will have an impact where they notice if all of
their books of this kind quit selling.




On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:13 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi legal-discuss@,
>
> I'm writing to this list as, although response has been great, I have
> struggled somewhat to obtain answers on other lists. The lists I've been to
> so far are trademarks@ and fundraising@ and the threads can be found at
> [0] and [1] respectively.
>
> SCENARIO
> The issues is as follows: shortly before Christmas I was approached by
> employees of Packt Publishing to review a book proposal. At that time I
> wrote to the publishing managers advising them that a huge portion of
> material had been ripped directly from the Nutch wiki with no mention of
> credit to original authors. It was disappointing to find that my comments
> were ignored and it was therefore at this point I asked for my name to be
> removed from any association with this book. As it turns out, the book was
> recently been published with the exact content I was referring to included.
> There is also no mention of original authors contributions. The trademark
> attribution is also extremely weak.
>
> QUESTIONS
>  * Generally speaking, is this OK? Does anyone have general comments on
> the above?
>  * Do we have a foundation policy in place regarding the licensing of our
> wiki content? e.g. Are our communities wide open and vulnerable to
> situations like the above or are there some safeguards in place?
>  * What relationship do we have (if any at all) with publishers using
> Apache trademarks and our community generated documentation, the latter in
> such plagiarist manner?
>  * What royalties does the foundation get from publishers who are making
> money from OUR community documentation? Are we getting a good deal in this
> regard? Are we being bent over and taken for a ride? It would appear to me
> that plagiarizing wiki content, packaging it as your own and publishing it
> is an extremely trivial task. The foundation should therefore also benefit
> from this outcome.
>
> These are just some of the questions which are unanswered. It would be
> very much appreciated if those with any input would voice it here.
>
> This issue will not go away.
> Thanks
> Lewis
>
> [0]
> *http://s.apache.org/lD7 <http://s.apache.org/lD7>[1] **http://s.apache.org/1Wk
> <http://s.apache.org/1Wk>*
> --
> *Lewis*
>

Mime
View raw message