Subject: (urth) Re: Lexicon Urthus

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:44:03 +0000

Oops.  Apologies all, my bad.  I thought gmail had deleted the first
draft, not sent it.

Won't happen again, I promise!

~Maru
for what's it worth, I think the first one is easier to read.

---

From: pthwndxrclzp <aquastor at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:50:06 +0000

If MA-D/Mantis were to grant a public license, and my doing so would
be within the constraints of such a license, I would be
delighted/honored to digitize the book and make the results available
to the list members. Given the passion and commitment of most if not
all of us, it seems a first-water tragedy (or vicious crime, take your
pick) that the book is essentially unavailable.

That said (well, written), and alternatively, should Mr. Mantis be
reading or sent a copy of this discussion, I should point out that
http://www.lulu.com/ could make printed copies available nearly
overnight, at whatever price MA-D deemed suitable (with a good and
well-deserved commission on each going directly to him -- I think lulu
charges about seven bucks for a perfect-bound copy, so with a price
point of, say, $20, I think he'd do okay, and he'd have a bunch of
newly-delighted customers).

For what it's worth, my $.02 on the subject. Er, two-hundredths of a
card. Whatever.

-Aquastor

*********************************************************

~Maru wrote:

I was not active on this list when mantis was, nor have my occasional
trawls through the archive (is it just me, or are the archive digests
broken? http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v212.shtml gives me a 404.)
really revealed much of mants' personality to me.
Is it within the realm of possibility that he might release LU under
the GNU Free Documentation License:

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:58:11 +0000

What is the status of Lexicon Urthus? Is it still a going concern? 
'Cause Sirius says that they are completely and utterly out of LU,
they've been so since 2002, there are no plans for a corrected second
edition, or even a second printing; also, no copy on Abebooks, Amazon,
Ebay or what-have-you is available for less than 100 US$.  Also,
mantis appears to have moved on with other fiction and essays, making
LU look like a classic example of abandonware or an orphaned work
(just rather young).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphaned_works

I am curious because it strikes me that the LU would make a
surpassingly excellent basis for the much-discussed FAQ for this ML. 
I, however, have nil personal experience with Druissi, and I've read
only a few posts by him, since I first joined this list long after he
ceased to be active here.  I need to know: is this within the realm of
possibility?  Would mantis/Andre-Druissi allow a work, which will
probably never see print again, which was only ever aimed at a faction
of a faction of a fraction of the reading audience, and a small
fraction at that, to be licensed, improved and used as a basis for a
vocab section for the FAQ?  Would he find licensing under the GPL free
documentation license, or the Creative Commons
attrib-derive-sharealike-nocommercial license, or another CC license,
would he find it impossible?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License
http://creativecommons.org
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/

Is this but a pipe dream? Is it worth pursuing?

~Maru

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:55:44 +0000

> For what it's worth, my $.02 on the subject. Er, two-hundredths of a

As long as you mean what I think you mean by 'public license', that's
great!  Now I can tell mantis that all he has to do is make a simple
statement, and we'll do the rest, which is a good selling point.

A minor point: is the mantis at siriusfiction.com address still good? Or
am I going to have to send an email to sales at siriusfiction.com, and a
snailmail to Sirius fiction's po box, with a request to forward to
MA-D? Or shall I do all three?

~Maru
going to work on rough draft of letter now.

---

From: James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:58:48 +0000

>...one could make an argument that online copies would not
>cannibalize a print-on-demand edition. At least for me, physical text
>is superior to bits, and worth paying for.

One could make that argument, but most people will never get around to actually crossing the line and buying a book -- particularly a $30 reference book -- if the same information is available for free...despite their best intentions. It's just human nature. Still, I'm surprised a third-party publisher has not successfully made a paperback offer that was financially worth Mantis' while.

I'm very proud of my particular copy, and I only wish more Gene Wolfe fans would visit my house so I could gloat over it.

J

---

From: pthwndxrclzp <aquastor at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:03:22 +0000

Ha! I just got mine back from loaning it to another list member, and I
have to confess, given the high cost of potentially replacing it, I
was chomping on my nails during the entire loan period.

But it came back in perfect condition, and everybody involved was
happy. (Well, except for Mantis, who could have made $$$ off the
situation if only the infernal thing had been even half-reasonably
available. Grrrr.)

Aq

On 7/22/05, James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:17:00 +0000

Argument time!  Cory Doctorow, who releases his novels in a
multiplicity of formats, many of which are more convenient to read
(such as Palm editions), estimates his sales have at least *tripled*
because of people tasting his novels online and then buying the print
version for perusal. I see no reason why the same principle would not
hold for LU-  would you buy a 30$ reference book sight unseen? With no
verification of the contents besides what a few reviews say? (Err...
That's a hypothetical you, just for the record.)

And as far as the third-party goes... I'm not surprised at all. The
surprise would be if the converse happened.  I mean, didn't LU not
sell out its first printing? Didn't a bunch of unsold copies have to
be auctioned off on Ebay?  That doesn't sound like a potential
blockbuster, or even a modest seller, unfortunately. Too restricted in
its appeal.

~Maru

On 7/22/05, James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net> wrote:
> One could make that argument, but most people will never get around to
> actually crossing the line and buying a book -- particularly a $30 reference
> book -- if the same information is available for free...despite their best
> intentions. It's just human nature. Still, I'm surprised a third-party
> publisher has not successfully made a paperback offer that was financially
> worth Mantis' while.
> 
> I'm very proud of my particular copy, and I only wish more Gene Wolfe fans
> would visit my house so I could gloat over it.
> 
> J

--

---

From: David DiGiacomo <david at slack.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:18:33 +0000

I had no trouble getting a copy to read via interlibrary loan.  It's not
as good as owning it, of course.

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:23:28 +0000

I did try that.  For one the few times ever, interlibrary loan failed
me! I don't know what to believe in now.

~Maru

--

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:26:30 +0000

Alright, I'm done. Here's the rough draft; critique as you will:

Dear Mr. Andre-Driussi:

On behalf on the Urth.net mailing list [0], I would like to ask you to
re-license ''Lexicon Urthus'' with a free-er license; by 'free' I mean
free as in speech [1], or the 'free software' sense [2].

I ask because your work is very well-known on the list, as are you,
but it is nigh impossible to acquire.  People like myself, who were
not around during the original printing of "Lexicon Urthus", now find
it impossible to acquire a copy.  No physical book stores possess any
of the run of 1000 books; Sirius Fiction says it is completely out,
with no plans for a corrected second printing, or a second edition
[3].  Abebooks, Amazon, Ebay etc. all demand a absolute minimum of 100
US$ for a copy, which may not even be in mint condition!  Simply put,
$ 100 is not doable for the vast majority of Wolfean readers, and a
year is a long time.

Releasing your work under a permissive license would cost you very
little; commercial prospects for "Lexicon Urthus" appear minimal, due
to the fact that by its very nature it appeals to a limited and select
group, so potential profit is very slim (though there is some demand
[5]).  Furthermore, if you feel there are opportunities for future
editions, you could simply release it under a Creative Commons [6]
license reserving commercial use of "Lexicon Urthus" exclusively to
yourself, but freely allowing non-profit usage of it [7], or perhaps
under another similar license [8]; or possibly even into the public
domain [9] (which, however, from our perspective would be ideal.
Public domain is the freest licensing scheme, and the simplest to
understand and work with). Or you could choose the GNU Free
Documentation License [10].

There are strong reasons to believe that a freely available online
edition will not cannibalize sales of "Lexicon Urthus"- Firstly, the
person who will read more than a smidgen of an online edition is very
probably a fan of Gene Wolfe's work, and so would buy an edition for
convenience, as reading online fatigues the eyes and is not always
possible, if they don't buy just to support critical Wolfe literature
or for their collection; Secondly, more likely, viewers will be
looking up a few entries. Seeing the quality of the entries, they may
well be more motivated to buy, since "Lexicon Urthus" would then not
be a book of unknown quality with a deterring price (Cory Doctorow
[11] notes on the Wikipedia article on him (a project known for its
sucess and its use of a free license [12]) that his books have sold
very well, thanks to his licensing practices [13]). Thirdly, all the
licenses suggested would allow you to incorporate our work into any
future editions for free.

Whichever you choose, be it one of those I suggested or a license of
your own devising, you need only reply with a refusal, or with a
simple statement saying "I hereby release my "Lexicon Urthus" under
the X license." And that's it- one of your fans has already
volunteered [14] to scan and format it; then the rest of us can set to
work improving it, fixing the small errors others have caught [15],
etc.

What motivation do I have to ask?  Simply that "Lexicon Urthus" could
be an excellent basis for the long-discussed Urth.net FAQ, since it
disposes of just about every vocabulary related question, is a primary
source document for many of the most popular theories, and is
comprehensive.

Thank you for your time. I hope you will consider my suggestions seriously.

~Maru Dubshinki

[0] http://www.urth.net/
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software
[3] http://www.siriusfiction.com/#lexicon
[4] http://lists.urth.net/htdig.cgi/urth-urth.net/2004-December/000159.html
[5] http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2005-July/001275.html
[6] http://creativecommons.org/ 
or 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons
[7] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
[8] http://creativecommons.org/license/
[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain
[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License 
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License
[11] http://www.craphound.com/
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow 
[12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cory_Doctorow
[13] http://craphound.com/someone/000362.html
[14] http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2005-July/001269.html
[15] http://www.siriusfiction.com/errata.html

---

From: pthwndxrclzp <aquastor at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:29:09 +0000

Wait, now I'm confused. I thought the previous email noted that one
can get a spiral-bound copy for about twenty-five bucks plus shipping.
Isn't that sufficient for most any need for the present? I'd hate
Mantis to feel like we were pushing him, given that the text is
apparently readily available (assuming you don't inherently loathe
spiral-bindings)....

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:43:20 +0000

I agree. If it's available POD (even spiralbound), and is being
revised, then I say leave it at that. There is no need to ask for
a GNU-type license.

-- 
I do not fear Satan half so much as I fear those who fear him.
                        -- St Teresa of Avila
http://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:28:01 +0000

> revised, then I say leave it at that. There is no need to ask for

Well, I was careful to point out that GNU's license was not the only
option, that Creative Commons had several different possible licenses,
that it was not all-or-nothing (all rights reserved vs. public
domain).
Indeed, the more I examine it, the less I like the Gnu documentation
license (the GPL is still the best thing since Lisp and sliced bread,
but that is neither here nor there); it has some rather nasty
provisos.  I myself, in my many contributions to Wikipedia, do not use
the GNU doc license. I release my articles and edits into the public
domain.
Still, I wish mantis had just noted on his website that he was
revising it, that it was gonna be published (and not just a 'maybe')
before I got all revved up.  And as I've said before, there is no real
need to ask... for now.

~Maru
that wasn't supposed to sound sinister