LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:13:48 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:24:30 +0000

>That's a ridiculous extrapolation from what I said. My remark had
>specifically to do with revised dissertations <snip>
>How to leap to the conclusion that I was arguing that publishers
>should be making all the decisions about all books is beyond me.

What I presented was hardly a "ridiculous extrapolation." You are arguing
that librarians shouldn't be told whether a UP book is a revised
dissertation, because librarians don't know as much as publishers do about
what went into the book. You may not have been deliberately arguing that
publishers should make all decisions about all books, but that's exactly
where your argument leads, given the fact that the same is true about
every book a publisher releases. Just because you don't want to take
responsibility for the implications of your argument doesn't make those
implications go away.

---
Rick Anderson
Interim Dean, J. Willard Marriott Library
University of Utah
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2