Sharing my library

Page 2 of 3 (44 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 43 Replies | 5 Followers

Posts 249
Giovanni Baggio | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 25 2011 10:04 PM

Rosie Perera:

Giovanni Baggio:
Can we report those who abuse the license

I don't think Logos has ever asked us or expected us to do that. I don't think they'd be inclined to prosecute if you did report such abuse [Then why have EULA if you're not going to enforce it?].

From what I've seen, they are pretty merciful in enforcement, preferring to leave it up to individual conscience. Your best recourse is to go to your brother and tell him you feel he's violating Logos's End User Licensing Agreement (you can direct him to it here) and that it's a matter of principle, supporting a company that he depends on to stay in business, setting a good example for his sons, etc. [I've told them and they said they've paid big money for it.  That's their excuse and when I tell them is wrong they give me a cynical smirk].

Your "friend" isn't sinning against you [if he's setting a bad example he's sinning against me and others Luke 17:1ff.], he's sinning against Logos, so beyond that I wouldn't worry about it too much [True, in a sense]. Look out that the desire to feel justified in your own eyes and holier than the other is not your motivation for wanting to report someone [No, that's certainly not my motivation - I'd probably done it a long time ago if that was my motivation]. Remember let him who is without sin cast the first stone [I'm not going to get into a theological debate, but this phrase needs to be kept in its original context.  We cannot use it as a general axiom to mute a legitimate rebuke of evil.], and we should deal with the logs in our own eyes before pointing out the specks in others' eyes [Another phrase taken out of context but I'm not going to argue about it].

If you feel the need to get Logos's approval before reporting this abuse, then perhaps you have your own doubts about sending in such an email and you already have your answer [No doubts really, I've already anonymously reported them since I have the choice of doing it anonymously]. Otherwise, why wouldn't you just do it [I've taken care of that already.  I've even reported websites that offered the full functioning version of Libronix.] and let Logos ignore it if they don't want to pursue these folks for more money?

Here's a great article that keeps "let him who is without sin cast the first stone" in it's true context.  I'm just sharing, you may want to read it or you may just choose to ignore it, up to you.  Author has been kept anonymous.

--- Over the past several months, as controversy has swirled around the president’s conduct, with almost predictable regularity media personalities have cited what is possibly the only passage in their biblical repository: “He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone.”

This passage has been perverted in a number of egregious ways. First, as in the present example, it is employed to minimize adultery. “Oh, we all sin,” it is claimed. “In the instance of John 8:1-11, a woman committed adultery, but Jesus did not condemn her. We should not, therefore, make a ‘big deal’ over such a trifling and personal matter.” Others “paint” with an even broader brush. They allege that no one who is flawed himself by sin has the right to censure anyone for any transgression; after all, none of us is “without sin.” No one, therefore, possesses the moral authority to condemn. This episode in the Gospel of John even has been cited in an effort to set aside the clear biblical injunctions which demand the discipline of apostate Christians.

We believe, therefore, that a careful consideration of this context is warranted. The details of the New Testament narrative are as follows.

A Synopsis of the Incident

Early one morning Jesus came from the Mount of Olives, just east of Jerusalem, to the temple compound of the sacred city. Probably in the court of the Gentiles, the Lord sat down (the usual posture for a Jewish teacher) and began to teach the folks who had gathered. Suddenly, there was a rude interruption. The scribes (copiers of the law, thus religious “experts”) and the Pharisees (those of the strictest Jewish sect—Acts 26:5), broke into the assembly, bringing a captive woman. They probably dragged her into the midst of the group.

Having positioned her prominently, they, with malevolent designs, fired a question at Jesus: “Teacher [no doubt with a tone of sarcasm], this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. The law of Moses commands that she be stoned. What do you say regarding her?” Quietly, the Son of God stooped down, and, with his finger wrote a message in the dust. (This is the only context in the New Testament which mentions Jesus writing.) The biblical text does not reveal the substance of the message. But the Lord said nothing.

The inquisitors continued to press him for a verbal response. It was at this point that he made the statement to which so many frequently appeal: “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.”

The Textual Controversy

Before giving some analysis to the passage, let us first briefly comment upon the matter of the genuineness of the context. Virtually every translation of the English Bible, this side of the 1611 King James Version, at least footnotes the passage, calling attention to the weak manuscript evidence behind the section embraced by John 7:53-8:11. All of the best Greek manuscripts, including the two oldest papyri (P66 and P75—dating from about A.D. 200) omit it. Most scholars—including many conservative ones—doubt that this section was a part of John’s original Gospel. On the other hand, some very respectable names defend it. The famous critic F.H.A. Scrivener affirmed that “the arguments in its favor, internal even more than external, are so powerful, that we can scarcely be brought to think it an unauthorized appendage to the writings” of John (1883, 610). One of the best summaries of the controversy is found in R.C. Foster’s, Studies in the Life of Christ (1971, 796ff).

In spite of the sparse manuscript evidence, there is a wide-spread conviction among textual critics (those who pursue the science of restoring the original text from available data) that this narrative represents a factual episode in the ministry of Jesus. Even Professor Bruce Metzger of Princeton University, a renowned textual scholar (and no conservative), concedes that “the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity” (1971, 220). There is much concurrence: “Throughout the history of the church it has been held that, whoever wrote [this section], this little story is authentic” (Morris 1971, 883). We are not, therefore, uncomfortable in accepting the record as actual history.

Analyzing the Facts of the Case

What are the basic facts of the case?

A sinful woman was somehow apprehended in the act of committing adultery, i.e., she was engaged in sexual activity that violated either her own marriage commitment, or that of her paramour. Adultery is a sexual act, and it involves the breach of the marriage covenant. There is virtually no controversy among language authorities regarding this matter, not to mention clear biblical testimony. “Let marriage be had in honor among all, and let the bed be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Hebrews 13:4). Note the connection between “bed” and “adulterers.” The rather modern—certainly novel—theory, which holds that adultery is only “covenant breaking,” whether or not sexual transgressions were involved, is utterly without merit, and is, in fact, a base attempt to sanctify adulterous relationships formed subsequent to unscriptural divorces.

It is more than obvious that the scribes and Pharisees were not the least interested in seeing true justice executed. Had they been in pursuit of justice, they would have taken the woman to the appropriate authorities for remedy. What did Jesus of Nazareth have to do with such legal affairs? Nothing at all. No, this was a trap laid for Christ. The Jews did not have the authority to execute law-breakers (see John 18:31). Rome retained for itself the right of life and death over its subjects. In A.D. 6 (the year that Judaea became a Roman province), Coponius, a governor, was sent to Palestine by Augustus Caesar. He was “granted supreme power over the Jews” (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.1.), which included the power of life and death (Wars of the Jews 2.8.1). Though this fact has been disputed by liberal critics, the historical evidence sustains the biblical record (Green 1992, 850). A.N. Sherwin-White, Professor of Ancient History at Oxford, has addressed this matter most thoroughly in his work, Roman Society And Roman Law In The New Testament (1978, 35ff).

Accordingly, had Jesus pronounced judicial sentence upon the sinful woman, the Jewish leaders would have reported the matter to the Roman authorities, and their diabolical plan to rid themselves of the Lord would have been achieved.

The accusers committed a colossal tactical blunder. Their charge itself contained information sufficient to expose their hypocrisy. The scribes and Pharisees emphatically declared that the poor woman had been caught “in the very act.” That is significant.

I am reminded of the circumstance where two men were in a fight and one bit off a portion of the other’s ear. When the case came to trial, the attorney for the accused asked a witness: “Did you see Mr. Jones bite off Mr. Smith’s ear?” “No,” the witness responded. The lawyer might well have stopped at that point with: “No further questions.” But he just had to ask one question more. “How, then, do you know that Jones bit off Smith’s ear?” “I saw him spit it out!”

When the Jewish leaders decided to be so specific, “in the very act,” they acknowledged an important point: they knew the identity of the male participant! What is the significance of that? Well, it is this: the Old Testament code demanded that both the adulteress and the adulterer be subjected to the same penalty (see Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). Where, then, was the man? These sanctimonious prosecutors were themselves in stark violation of the law. Had Jesus been under a commission to render a civil judgment in this case (and he did not come to attend to such matters—see Luke 12:13-14), he could not have countenanced this “kangaroo” procedure. The thrust of Christ’s statement—“He that is without sin . . .”—was this: “None of you is in a position to stone this woman, for you have disregarded the very law you profess to honor. It is a travesty.”

Remember this: the Savior’s admonition in John 8 cannot be divorced from its immediate context and used as a general axiom, the design of which is to mute the legitimate rebuke of evil. Even some Bible scholars have missed this point. William Barclay, the famous Scottish writer, was far off the mark when he, in connection with this verse, declared: “It was a first principle of Jesus that only the man who himself is without fault has the right to express judgment on the fault of others” (1955, 7). That is a misappropriation of this text.

Whatever Christ wrote on the ground made a powerful impact upon his critics. Silently they slipped away into the shadows, progressing from the older to the younger. This effect usually is interpreted as an indication that the Lord’s written message impacted the more mature first, and then the younger. It is hard to focus upon another’s sin when your own is exposed. At any rate, Jesus’ response—whatever it was—was devastating. The Pharisees’ inconsistency had been laid bare.

The accusers abandoned their prey. They were no match for the Son of God (neither is any critic today). The Lord arose and spoke to the woman. (Had she been defiant? Was she weeping? We can only wonder.) Christ inquired: “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” The use of the expression “woman” might seem a tad sharp to the modern English mind, but the address conveys no such meaning in the original language (cf. John 2:4; 19:26). Christ then added: “Neither do I condemn you.”

The Greek word for “condemn” is a strong one, katakrino (the prefix kata strengthens the root form). It suggests handing down a judgment, passing sentence. The Lord was informing the woman that she was not judicially sentenced. As Bloomfield observed, Jesus was simply making “a declaration that, since his kingdom was not of this world, so he would not assume the office of a temporal magistracy” (1837, 376). He was not sanctioning adultery, nor minimizing the lady’s wickedness—quite the contrary. Christ was commenting upon the legal aspect of the situation. With the accusers gone, there was no case left! The witnesses were required to throw the first stones (Deuteronomy 17:7); without them the matter could proceed no further.

Even a cursory reading of the text reveals that the Lord did not condone the woman’s sin. In fact, he said: “Go on your way; and sin no more.” The verb (“sin”) is a present tense form in the imperative (command) mood. The idea conveyed is: “Stop this life of sin.” Or, as William F. Beck rendered it: “Go, from now on don’t sin anymore” (1963, 181). Christ unequivocally indicated that what the woman did was sin.

Conclusion

It is apparent that the common, cast-the-first-stone defense cannot be employed legitimately as a cloak for the protection of impenitent sin. Consider the following facts.

Paul taught that there is none righteous, no not one (Romans 3:10). That included himself. He sometimes found himself doing wrong (Romans 7:15). He had to fight to keep himself under the Lord’s control (1 Corinthians 9:26-27). He knew that so long as he remained in the flesh he would never achieve a permanent plateau of perfection (Philippians 3:12).

On the other hand, the apostle did not hesitate to “judge” a brother who was living in open, impenitent sin (1 Corinthians 5:3), and he rebuked those who tolerated such (1 Corinthians 5:1-13). Paul had learned the Master’s truth that while we are not to judge according to appearances, we are obligated to “judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Paul thus withdrew his fellowship from blasphemers like Hymenaeus and Alexander (1 Timothy 1:19-20), and again, exposed Hymanaeus and Philetus when they taught that the resurrection had occurred already (2 Timothy 2:17-18). Nor did he hesitate to openly mention that Demas fell in love with the world and forsook him (2 Timothy 4:10).

It is obvious, therefore, that one does not have to be “without sin” before he can call attention to the grievous error that wicked men practice on a sustained basis.

The misuse of John 8:1-11, as a covering for unrestrained sin, is a gross evil within itself.

Sources/Footnotes
  • Barclay, William. 1955. The Gospel of John. Vol. 2. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press.
  • Beck, William F. 1963. The New Testament in the Language of Today. St. Louis, MO: Concordia.
  • Bloomfield, S. T. 1837. The Greek Testament with English Notes. Vol. 2. Boston, MA: Perkins & Marvin.
  • Foster, R. C. 1971. Studies in the Life of Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.
  • Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall, eds. 1992. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
  • Metzger, Bruce M. 1971. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. London, England: United Bible Societies.
  • Morris, Leon. 1971. The Gospel According to John. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
  • Scrivener, F. H. A. 1883. A Plain Introduction to the Cristicism of the New Testament. Cambridge, England: Deighton, Bell & Co.
  • Sherwin-White, A. N. 1978. Roman Society And Roman Law In The New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 25 2011 10:42 PM

Giovanni Baggio:

Here's a great article that keeps "let him who is without sin cast the first stone" in it's true context.  I'm just sharing, you may want to read it or you may just choose to ignore it, up to you.  Author has been kept anonymous.

--- Over the past several months, as controversy has swirled around the president’s conduct, with almost predictable regularity media personalities have cited what is possibly the only passage in their biblical repository: “He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone.”

This passage has been perverted in a number of egregious ways. First, as in the present example, it is employed to minimize adultery. “Oh, we all sin,” it is claimed. “In the instance of John 8:1-11, a woman committed adultery, but Jesus did not condemn her. We should not, therefore, make a ‘big deal’ over such a trifling and personal matter.” Others “paint” with an even broader brush. They allege that no one who is flawed himself by sin has the right to censure anyone for any transgression; after all, none of us is “without sin.” No one, therefore, possesses the moral authority to condemn. This episode in the Gospel of John even has been cited in an effort to set aside the clear biblical injunctions which demand the discipline of apostate Christians.

We believe, therefore, that a careful consideration of this context is warranted. The details of the New Testament narrative are as follows.

A Synopsis of the Incident

Early one morning Jesus came from the Mount of Olives, just east of Jerusalem, to the temple compound of the sacred city. Probably in the court of the Gentiles, the Lord sat down (the usual posture for a Jewish teacher) and began to teach the folks who had gathered. Suddenly, there was a rude interruption. The scribes (copiers of the law, thus religious “experts”) and the Pharisees (those of the strictest Jewish sect—Acts 26:5), broke into the assembly, bringing a captive woman. They probably dragged her into the midst of the group.

Having positioned her prominently, they, with malevolent designs, fired a question at Jesus: “Teacher [no doubt with a tone of sarcasm], this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. The law of Moses commands that she be stoned. What do you say regarding her?” Quietly, the Son of God stooped down, and, with his finger wrote a message in the dust. (This is the only context in the New Testament which mentions Jesus writing.) The biblical text does not reveal the substance of the message. But the Lord said nothing.

The inquisitors continued to press him for a verbal response. It was at this point that he made the statement to which so many frequently appeal: “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.”

While we are admonished periodically to avoid theological discussions, I cannot let this pass.  The passage to which reference is made is not a part of the original Gospel according to John.  It has been absent from some manuscripts and found in others in differing places (including in Luke).  My personal opinion is that it most likely derives from the now lost Gospel of the Hebrews and was simply too delicious a passage to let it fade into obscurity.  Who knows, but it might even go back to a real incident in the life of Jesus.  I would, however, be careful in citing it.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 26512
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 25 2011 11:27 PM

Giovanni Baggio:
Author has been kept anonymous.

Just curious, why?

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 25 2011 11:38 PM

MJ. Smith:

Giovanni Baggio:
Author has been kept anonymous.

Just curious, why?

Indeed, why.  The author did not attempt to conceal his identity.  His name is Wayne Jackson, and the article can be found at

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/34-the-current-perversion-of-john-8-1-11

Don't you just love Google (and other search engines).

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 249
Giovanni Baggio | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 26 2011 12:14 AM

Thanks George, I'm aware that the passage is not in the oldest manuscripts, yet if it was a "legitimate passage" the article written by the Brother (not anonymous anymore) would be the correct interpretation.  My take on it every time I'm asked concerning Jesus' "...cast the first stone" statement is "it's not in the original...etc." but many don't know that and even if they know it they still use it in the wrong way and that's when I go to plan B which is to explain what was written in the article to keep Jesus' statement in its actual context.

But like you said, no theological debates, so it's all cool on this side of the world.

Blessings & Good night!

Giovanni

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 26 2011 9:23 AM

Am I alone  or has anyone else noticed the forum discussions get real interesting on Friday evening and run the whole weekend?

I really enjoy it. Big Smile 

Coffee

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 637
Frank Sauer | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 26 2011 11:28 AM

Not only weekends Matthew... But even more so on weekends when all the beta addicts are clicking update now every minute is hopes that they can get their fix... lol Wink

 

Matthew C Jones:

Am I alone  or has anyone else noticed the forum discussions get real interesting on Friday evening and run the whole weekend?

I really enjoy it. Big Smile 

Coffee

 

Posts 10548
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 26 2011 12:12 PM

Frank Sauer:
Not only weekends Matthew... But even more so on weekends when all the beta addicts are clicking update now every minute is hopes that they can get their fix... lol Wink

Hey, some of us beta addicts can multi-task by participating in interesting discussions while clicking Update Now repeatedly. Cool

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 26 2011 12:37 PM

Frank Sauer:
clicking update now every minute is hopes that they can get their fix... lol Wink

I already have more addictions than I can handle

  • Coffee  Coffee
  • Logos general forums Whisper
  • Logos resource acquisitions 
  • replenishing the Earth Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person
  • electricity & electronics Idea
  • eBay buying Embarrassed

I can't get hooked on beta testing right now.

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 7
John Doe ABC | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 30 2011 4:04 PM

Pro 11:13 A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter.

Pro 25:9  Debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself; and discover not a secret to another:

Pro 20:19  He that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets: therefore meddle not with him that flattereth with his lips.

Mat 18:15  Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
Mat 18:16  But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
Mat 18:17  And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

 

 

The Bible is clear and final.

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 30 2011 4:21 PM

John Doe ABC:

Pro 11:13 A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter.

Pro 25:9  Debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself; and discover not a secret to another:

Pro 20:19  He that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets: therefore meddle not with him that flattereth with his lips.

Mat 18:15  Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
Mat 18:16  But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
Mat 18:17  And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

 

 

The Bible is clear and final.

What is this?  A troll?  No wonder he uses the name "John Doe."

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 30 2011 4:31 PM

George Somsel:
What is this? 

I think it is a Bible based response to Giovanni wanting to blow the whistle on piracy..............

 at least it makes more sense reading it that way. 

(The reply was linked to my post confirming Lynden's comment of transferring duplicate licenses.)

I like to read these verses often. It reminds me it is all about reconciliation, not condemnation. Big Smile

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 17
Matt W | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 30 2011 11:38 PM

I think what is needed is a technical solution.  I understand the licensing policy.  I also understand the desire to loan books out to friends and family like we do in print - especially when so much money is invested in a library.

Logos should create a solution which would allow temporary license transfers for a set amount of time.  The original owner would lose access to that resource while the book is on loan.  Therefore only one person is using the resource at a time as they would with a book.  Some publishers won't allow this, but many will.

The ability to loan digital books would add much more value to Logos.  This restrictive policy is the reason why I still buy many books in print instead of Logos.

 

Posts 2402
David Ames | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 5:00 AM

Many OLD threads have many good discussions on Pricing

So I thought that I would add to it here rather then start a new one

 

Highlights:

Books have to sell.

Publishers want to make the most

Lots of sales at a low price or some sales at a very high price are the possible strategies

Perceived HIGH value of HALOT / BDAG    AYDB  (and others  for example large scholarly commentary sets)

Plus the added value of Logos format

 

PRICING of E books when we take into consideration that each reader needs their own copy (no sharing)

 

The idea from threads (not a quote): ‘I spent $2,000 for the E book version because the print version is selling $3,000 [great bargain].  But latter remembers that now I cannot share it with my three preacher sons / three sup pastors in my church.  You mean to tell me that our family / church has to pay $8,000 for all four of us to use it?’ [[ YES!!!! ]]

 

Who buys sets in the say $3,000 range?  A Church or School library, a senior pastor who plans to use it to train his sub pastors (and shares his goodies with his students) – I.E. units / people that plan to share the work.  And an occasional isolated user (most likely a researcher who does not have access to a library that has a copy [and who may expect to get their money back when the research is sold?]). 

 

If in the paper world you could not allow others to use it would they sell even one copy?  [[Only the head librarian can look at this book  – please place your request and she will give you a printed report when available -  please allow two to three weeks lead time – 5 to 6 weeks lead times near finals – please do not request more than three (3) pages of output per request]]

 

The ongoing thought has been that a good E book price for a Logos resource after Logos has ‘done its thing’ is near what the paper copy sells for.  But have we taken into account that paper copies can be shared while Logos E-books cannot be. (If you are the head pastor and your kids are in Grade / High School and they are only taking bible lessons (they are not writing them) they probably can – but once they go to Seminary they must have their own copy)

 

Is the paper copy price still a good E-book price when we take into account that we can share the paper copy but need to buy each (moderate to heavy) Logos user their own Logos copy? 

 

If you were attached to a library that had 30 users – is this resource seen as being worth $3,000 or seen as being worth $100 per user?   Is the perceived price, by the Buyer for the library, $3,000 or $100?

 

In this (made up) example it is costing us $2,000 per user in Logos whereas the paper would cost us only $750 per user (4 users at 3000 – see above)

 

Being able to LOAN a book would bring it into the price range of a paper copy (price per copy) – now it is way higher (price per user)

{HELP! how do I prevent double spacing in my post? [pasted from WORD] thanks!}

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 5:22 AM

David Ames:

{HELP! how do I prevent double spacing in my post? [pasted from WORD] thanks!}

For this reply, clicked Quote to copy reply. Then clicked HTML button in forum editor, which showed many blank paragraph lines:

<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:small;">&nbsp;</span></p>

HTML tags <p> and </p> delimit a paragraph.  Have learned to use Preview button so see HTML rendering; if looks good, then Post, otherwise click Compose to return to forum editor.  Sometimes forum editor changes from paragraph to divisions <div> </div>, which shows lines flowing together (HTML edit change div to p and remove extra divisions).

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 8:41 AM

\

Matt W:
I think what is needed is a technical solution.

We know it could be done on a technical level. I think we need an economic solution to proceed.

Let us pretend for a moment that you are a publisher of Christian books and hold copyrights to a few hundred reasonably well selling titles. (Remembering that you paid out advances to authors and promoted advertising campaigns to push your products before the intended audience you of course want to maximize your profits.)

Now the industry leader in Bible study software approaches you about publishing your copyrighted works in their software program that reaches many of the same audience your printed works appeal to. This sounds like a dream come true  until your accountant and attorney tell you the software company just added a library loan feature. Now you wonder what effect this will have on your bottom line. It could actually increase sales of your books due to better exposure. Or it could result in a 75% loss of paying customers who can now just borrow a copy from their friends.

The arrangement would be profitable for the software publisher because borrowers would have to purchase their own license to the basic program to borrow from another user. But then Churches and Colleges would buy a Portfolio license and loan out copies to students and members who might have otherwise bought their own.  

The Bible software publisher could just tell themselves they are acting like Boaz and leaving some grain on the edge of the fields for the poor to harvest. But that leaves you, the copyright holder, wondering how you will promote your product and pay royalties to your authors. Unless everybody will work for free - farmers feeding the author's families, Mechanics servicing their cars, doctors attending their sicknesses.......) And the nightmare begins.

Why would a publisher sign on?

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 8:53 AM

Matthew C Jones:

\

Matt W:
I think what is needed is a technical solution.

We know it could be done on a technical level. I think we need an economic solution to proceed.

Let us pretend for a moment that you are a publisher of Christian books and hold copyrights to a few hundred reasonably well selling titles. (Remembering that you paid out advances to authors and promoted advertising campaigns to push your products before the intended audience you of course want to maximize your profits.)

Now the industry leader in Bible study software approaches you about publishing your copyrighted works in their software program that reaches many of the same audience your printed works appeal to. This sounds like a dream come true  until your accountant and attorney tell you the software company just added a library loan feature. Now you wonder what effect this will have on your bottom line. It could actually increase sales of your books due to better exposure. Or it could result in a 75% loss of paying customers who can now just borrow a copy from their friends.

The arrangement would be profitable for the software publisher because borrowers would have to purchase their own license to the basic program to borrow from another user. But then Churches and Colleges would buy a Portfolio license and loan out copies to students and members who might have otherwise bought their own.  

The Bible software publisher could just tell themselves they are acting like Boaz and leaving some grain on the edge of the fields for the poor to harvest. But that leaves you, the copyright holder, wondering how you will promote your product and pay royalties to your authors. Unless everybody will work for free - farmers feeding the author's families, Mechanics servicing their cars, doctors attending their sicknesses.......) And the nightmare begins.

Why would a publisher sign on?

Just a wild thought.  Perhaps a fee could be charged for the loan of a book equivalent to a percentage of the royalty paid to the copyright holder to be determined by the length of the loan or a minimum figure to be determined.  At that point a hold would be placed on the purchaser's copy and a limited duration license issued to the one borrowing the resource.  The royalty would naturally be paid to the copyright holder or, in the case of out of copyright resources, retained by Logos to defray expenses.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 386
MJD | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 9:08 AM

David,

 

Your perspective is well stated, and has much merit.  I think there is great value in the print version because it allows for sharing.  The pricing of a digital copy which allows only one person to use it is very limiting.

On the other hand, from the research side the electronic format is way more functional.

From the publishing side of it, I would assume that after you recover your initial costs.  Digital printing seems like a more economical way to market. 

The interesting thing is that Amazon, has now started a program on the Kindle that allows for book sharing with some publisher's works.

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 9:22 AM

George Somsel:
Just a wild thought.  Perhaps a fee could be charged for the loan of a book equivalent to a percentage of the royalty paid to the copyright holder to be determined by the length of the loan or a minimum figure to be determined. 

Now that is an economic solution.  If their bread gets buttered (that is parsnips to our friends across the pond) publishers have little reason to resist.

I see no reason Logos could not stand in as the Loaner (renter?) of all resources now that Logos 4 syncs with the mother-ship. 

(I don't like the way that last sentence sounds...    sync-ing ships??   Indifferent )

I did raise the issue directly with Logos last year, suggesting different models of licensing. I thought a subscription model would be profitable or a lifetime, non-transferable model for reduced cost. Some users want to OWN their resources.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 31 2011 9:26 AM

Matthew C Jones:
I see no reason Logos could not stand in as the Loaner (renter?) of all resources now that Logos 4 syncs with the mother-ship

So long as it isn't the "Mother wheel."

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Page 2 of 3 (44 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next > | RSS