>Robert,
>
>The question that comes to my mind is why would anyone who had any
>genuine concern about PCP, for any reason whatsoever, and especially
>for narrow, self-serving, self-aggrandizing reasons as exemplified by
>your concerns about "significant copyright and subscription issues",
>put any impediments whatsoever, in the way of the widest possible
>dissemination of the ideas of GAK. You didn't originate those ideas.
>
>Joe Whitehurst
I assume that Bob's concern for "significant copyright and subscription
issues" is exactly what it states: that he has a legal responsibility to
the journal publishers which prevents him from reproducing it on the Web
until the day (which we'd all welcome) when electronic reproduction issues
have been explored and made possible.
Or is the tone of Joe's message part of some vendetta? Bob edits a journal
for which people pay a subscription (in my case, a personal one) and he has
a responsibility to people like me _not_ to make the contents available for
free to people who don't subscribe, until the day when subscriptions to
paper versus electronic media are sorted out.
The people who develop Kelly's ideas published therein (and I'm one of
them) are quite comfortable with the idea that the editor protects their
copyright as part of his contract with them and the publisher.
Or did I misunderstand you, Joe?
Devi Jankowicz
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%