On 3/16/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG
<guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
> I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
>
> So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article? To be
> reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> anything other than an absurdity? Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> fatally borken?
> Guy (JzG)
Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
dummies watch or something.
It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio? I was
under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
Kirill Lokshin
It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
computing" section is argubly creative.
Well, it is prefaced with "Note that this list contains some
duplicates; some books are part of multiple ...For Dummies series."
I'm not terribly familiar with these books; do they have something,
like a spine label, giving the series? If that's the case, listing it
by these isn't particularly creative on our part.
Kirill Lokshin