Online and out of print

Ivan Hoffman <ivanlove[_at_]earthlink.net> writes:
>
> Being one of the promoters of the Internet, I will take this
> opportunity to disagree. There is a significant and sizable difference
> between the examples Albert gives. Let us remember that, for the
> purposes of this discussion, the Internet is about 4 things:
>
> 1. Marketing
> 2. Promotion
> 3. Promotion
> 4. Marketing.
>
> That difference alters the situation completely. And if the author of
> the work, be it scholarly or otherwise, either understands or learns
> about how to market and promote, he or she may find the dust being
> blown off the monograph.

If the author must do the promotion and marketing, then don't you agree that the publisher should lose all rights when stocks of printed copies are exhausted? It is bad enough that so many authors are asked for cash by learned publishers seeking subsidies. (Where will publishers get the money to put all these books online??!) Why shouldn't the author recover rights when there are no copies in print, and look for another publisher willing to invest hard cash and other resources in the author and his/her work?

> Many of my articles that first appeared on the Net have been published
> in numerous hard copy versions.

You are not alone, and that's fine. But are your articles, that interest Internet junkies, relevant? The majority of books are directed at markets that have no interest in IT and very likely no capability.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com Received on Tue Feb 25 1997 - 22:38:20 GMT