use Perl

• Benchmarks (Score:1)

  by Wassercrats (6363)

  So, I guess you think it's wacky for me to be against a publisher who post-copyrights technical books, which people tend to want to be up-to-date, and a publisher of a book that "Rather than simply describing the vulnerabilities and their exploits theoretically or showing you how to use pre-existing tools to exploit the vulnerabilities...provides the nuts & bolts you need to learn how to program your own exploit code." At least you linked to my post, but I'm wondering exactly what you disagree with abou
  • Copyright Dates in Books (Score:1)

    by chromatic (983)

    I guess you think it's wacky for me to be against a publisher who post-copyrights technical books...

    As explained before, this is what book publishers do with the permission of the Library of Congress so as to receive copyright the entire length of the copyright period, and not just part of the last year.

    (Of course, O'Reilly books enter the public domain long before the copyright period expires.)

    If the copyright year of 2006 for a book that goes to the printer in December 2005 really causes you that
    • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:1)

      by Wassercrats (6363)

      There was a greater difference between the date I bought the book and the printed copyright date than that. Lets try to not be misleading with our examples. I don't know when the book first went on sale, but I bought the book in November and the copyright was listed as the next year. See my original post about it here [perlmonks.org], where I also quote copyright law. If there's some aspect of the law that makes printing a later copyright legal, and if it's done on all major books when applicable, then I'd withdraw my com
      • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:1)

        by chromatic (983)

        ... at this point I'm not interested in looking into it more deeply than I have.

        There's a word for people who refuse to change their opinions and continue to complain anyway after being corrected.
        • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:1)

          by Wassercrats (6363) on 2006.05.26 18:54 (#47889) Homepage

          To me, the hacking book is enough to justify a boycott. As for the copyright issue, I believe I'm the only one who quoted copyright law, and I haven't seen enough information on how common it is to post date books to let O'Reilly off the hook for what seems like deceptive business practices and a violation of copyright law. But at the same time, I'm not going to say you're wrong if you think it's legal and common.

          Reply to This

          Parent

          • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:2)

            by pudge (1)

            To me, you're an idiot no one cares about.
            
            • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:1)

              by hex (3272)

              +1, Insightful
          • Re:Copyright Dates in Books (Score:2)

            by petdance (2468)

            To me, the hacking book is enough to justify a boycott.

            Don't let us stop you! Carry on! Stick it to the man!

            --
            

            --
            xoa