Re: Snooze/lose (Was: Academics and coursepacks)

On Wed, 19 Aug 1998, Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
>
> I, for one, would acknowledge the merit in the argument that since
> photocopiers are widely used, we can assume people are pirating at
> least some of the time, and that longer copyright terms allow for a
> better opportunity to recoup those losses, but I can agree ONLY IF THE
> PUBLISHER KEEPS IT IN PRINT. You snooze, you lose. Use it or lose it!
>
> I should add that keeping a book in print even after the copyright
> has expired will still enable the publisher to recoup losses from
> illegitimate copying.

Then we should advocate a change in the tax code to reverse the Thor Tool decision which forces publishers to destroy books that they previously would have kept while taking write-offs. Under the old system, a publisher could report taxable profit on actual sales while keeping inventory at no taxable value. After Thor publishers reduced printings and physical inventories. Like the spare parts for industrial machine tools, special interest books sell too slowly for the IRS. The needs of latecomers like yourself are of no interest.

I thought there was substantial irritation over Thor at the time, nearly 20 years ago. Obviously not enough.

The work can be reprinted under copyright when the publisher perceived sufficient market. The author may require updating.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com Received on Thu Aug 20 1998 - 00:05:30 GMT