|
|
 | | Re: O'Reilly book news
|
| (...) However, it seems extremely unreasonable in the case of books about a product. In fact, although I'm not a lawyer, this use of trademarks seems 100% within the precedent set for fair use: it's impossible to describe _without_ using the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: O'Reilly book news
|
| (...) I just think it's incredibly ironic, if not a bizarre turn of events. It's surprising to see TLC jumping on the opportunity to take advantage of books written by people in the AFOL community that support it. Maybe they'll give a portion of the (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: O'Reilly book news
|
| (...) I don't really understand how the associates stuff works: if no one collects the referal fee, doesn't Amazon just keep it as extra profit for themselves? Certainly the authors don't collect a smaller royalty if a referal fee is given? So I (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: O'Reilly book news
|
| (...) I assume Jonathan (and ORA) went through the same discussions my publisher did with TLG regarding using "Mindstorms" in a book title. Lego had no problem at all with people writing books...in fact I've gotten a lot of encouraging feedback from (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego) !
| | | | | Re: O'Reilly book news
|
| Suzanne D. Rich wrote: [snip] (...) Could you please explain further? What is an "associate code" and how does it work? /Eric McC/ (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
|
