I'm sure this has been suggested before, at least in the Newsgroup. But I would love to have C.S. Lewis in Logos.
Brad
I would too.
1 more vote [Y]
Voting with 8 hands that we have in our family [:D]
I would love to have the cash to afford a C.S. Lewis Collection. [;)]
I'm sure this has been suggested before, at least in the Newsgroup. But I would love to have C.S. Lewis in Logos. Brad
Add my vote to the list. [Y]
Jack
I would love to have the cash to afford a C.S. Lewis Collection.
Is this a hint that you would like someone to give you the cash for it? First, Logos has to get the rights to publish it which I understand the family is keeping somewhat tight control over. It's a Brit copyright so I'm not sure when or if it becomes public domain. If you find someone to bankroll you, point them my way since I could use a little infusion of cash as well. [6] [:D]
Voting with 8 hands that we have in our family
Add 24 more raised hands at my house. It would be nice to have the complete works including Narnia & The Space Trilogy. But if the family is still making too much money off Narnia to make it affordable I'd still be happy with just his non-fiction.
Voting with 8 hands that we have in our family Add 24 more raised hands at my house.
Add 24 more raised hands at my house.
Is that 32 licenses? I expect that it is only one vote per license! [:)] But I will add my vote, that takes care of one of the missing licenses.
Blessings,
Floyd
Voting with 8 hands that we have in our family Add 24 more raised hands at my house. Is that 32 licenses? I expect that it is only one vote per license! But I will add my vote, that takes care of one of the missing licenses. Blessings, Floyd
Is that 32 licenses? I expect that it is only one vote per license! But I will add my vote, that takes care of one of the missing licenses.
I don't know Floyd,
Here "one license = one vote" might be the way to go. But most churches, including mine, allow children to get saved, tithe and volunteer for work but disallow them to vote[N] Many saved kids behave more Christ-like than their saved parents. (There I go again, veering off topic.)
I agree, this would be most welcomed.
ditto
The CS Lewis Collection would be a nice addition to my logos library. Is there any thing in the pipe concerning this?
Blessings-
John
The CS Lewis Collection would be a nice addition to my logos library. Is there any thing in the pipe concerning this
We've discussed this topic many times in the past. The C.S. Lewis estate and the publishing house that owns the rights to his material (Harper-Collins I think) keep a very jealous grip on this particular pot of gold. Unless something's changed since the last time it was brought up, neither of these parties has any interest in allowing the distribution of soft copies of Lewis' books in any form. They think it's dangerous. Somebody out there might just wind up with a free, unauthorized copy somewhere along the line causing the conglomerate lose ten bucks.
Yours in Christ
John is right. The family has circled the wagons around the don's intellectual property. It's understandable, and it's their prerogative and right, but you have to think Clive Stapes himself wouldn't be so comfortable with the legacy of his influence being leveraged completely on the basis of cash. He was a generous man who gave away most of the proceeds of his books in his own time, even after he became a best-selling author with his face on the cover of TIME magazine. He spent time writing letters to children and correspondents he would never meet. If "the family" had been around, you wonder if they would have made him charge the tots for his autographed letters.
Many of us quote Lewis frequently. It would be wonderful to be able to search his books, essays, letters, and literary works.
The irony, the family would probably make more money with the books in electronic media, it is the future.
John is right. The family has circled the wagons around the don's intellectual property. It's understandable, and it's their prerogative and right, but you have to think Clive Stapes himself wouldn't be so comfortable with the legacy of his influence being leveraged completely on the basis of cash.
I think he's turning over in his grave. Had he known ahead of time that his estate would end up epitomizing greed the way it has (or at least having that appearance of epitomizing greed) I think he would have rewritten his will to pass the rights to his literary work to a church or a bible society or something.
I'll say. Trying to find references to little bits like his flatworld metaphor in this stack of paperbacks is hard work. Some of his books are almost reference works. there's a lot of theology in there (even though Lewis denied being theological). You want to quote the guy and you want your quotes to be accurate. Finding the quotes is not an easy thing to do.
Well, I think they think that making bootleg copies is a lot easier if there are electronic copies floating around all over the place. In fact, I don't think that's true. I think if the electronic copies are well encrypted then it would be much easier just to buy a good scanner and go out and buy paper copies from a book store.
This paranoid attitude seems all the more ludicrous when you consider that the only works of his that are popular enough to make a C.S. Lewis bootleg business venture worth while are his Narnia books. Those are the books that are of least interest as far as bible software goes. The most valuable works along those lines are his apologetic books like "Mere Christianity".
Oh well, that's the way it goes I suppose.
John, Check out today's blog on Logos and see if this solution might help you. Morris Proctor explains how to do a proximity search of Francis Schaeffer . I bet this would work well in finding stuff in C. S. Lewis too.
The CS Lewis Collection would be a nice addition to my logos library. Is there any thing in the pipe concerning this We've discussed this topic many times in the past. The C.S. Lewis estate and the publishing house that owns the rights to his material (Harper-Collins I think) keep a very jealous grip on this particular pot of gold. Unless something's changed since the last time it was brought up, neither of these parties has any interest in allowing the distribution of soft copies of Lewis' books in any form. They think it's dangerous. Somebody out there might just wind up with a free, unauthorized copy somewhere along the line causing the conglomerate lose ten bucks. Yours in Christ John
I just did a little checking on this which I should have done a long time ago. Under the copyright laws of GB the term of the copyright is the author's life + 70. That means that, unless there is further revision to the law, the Lewis writings will become public domain in 2033. At that point the family or the publisher will have nothing to say regarding the matter. The works of J. R. R. Tolkien will become public domain in 2043. It may be that whoever holds the copyright for these may be more amenable to their electronic publication.
Now, if I can just hang on 'til then!
BTW, George you look great in your avatar. Where did you get the snappy threads?
Looks like I'll just have to wait a while.
I would also like to see the works of Lewis on Logos.
John is right. The family has circled the wagons around the don's intellectual property. It's understandable, and it's their prerogative and right, but you have to think Clive Stapes himself wouldn't be so comfortable with the legacy of his influence being leveraged completely on the basis of cash. ...
Actually, I don't think it's understandable. Intellectual property rights are simply a sham. There is no such thing as "intellectual property."
I would also like to see the works of Lewis on Logos. John is right. The family has circled the wagons around the don's intellectual property. It's understandable, and it's their prerogative and right, but you have to think Clive Stapes himself wouldn't be so comfortable with the legacy of his influence being leveraged completely on the basis of cash. ... Actually, I don't think it's understandable. Intellectual property rights are simply a sham. There is no such thing as "intellectual property."
I think you should wait until you have written a well-received book or produced some other work such as a painting or a film or a piece of music before you make such a statement. It takes real work to do that -- they don't just fall off the turnip truck. You pour your very soul into it, and just as most want to be able to pass on any wealth they have accumulated to their children or other loved ones on their death so does an author. It IS HIS RIGHT !
DuPont & General Motors seem to think differently. Every patent developed from within their labs belong to them. Mattel won a judgement against their former employee (creator of the Bratz dolls) for the full amount of his profits and ownership of the Bratz company.
When General Motors refused to pay me for freelance robotics programming, I exercised my legal rights and refused to deliver the program. They lost money exponentially higher than the fair amount of my wages.
I just wonder if a C. S. Lewis Collection would include the controversial pseudepigrapha. Not since the Shakespeare vs Alexander Pope mystery has there been this level of questioning. [6]
Deleted because I double clicked "post" and had a double entry.
( shaky trigger-finger here. )
I would love to have CS Lewis' stuff in Logos
I. How do you know that I haven’t?
II. If I haven’t, how is that an argument for the existence of intellectualproperty rights? It looks to me like a simple ad hominem.
III. Obviously I disagree that it’s his right, so Idon’t find your assertion to the contrary very persuasive. (Bold caps don't help either, unfortunately.)
IV. Rather than get into a debate about intellectualproperty rights, (your reply didn’t give any real arguments to the contrary) I’ll just point out where you can findarguments against them and, if you’re interested, you can study for yourselfand decide whether you agree or not. (see here http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Property-Stephan-Kinsella/dp/B001DTHFWS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259341896&sr=8-1 , here http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Monopoly-Michele-Boldrin/dp/0521879280/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259341939&sr=1-1, here http://mises.org/media/4255, here http://mises.org/story/3631 , and here http://mises.org/daily/2632 )
DuPont & General Motors seem to think differently. Every patent developed from within their labs belong to them. Mattel won a judgement against their former employee (creator of the Bratz dolls) for the full amount of his profits and ownership of the Bratz company. When General Motors refused to pay me for freelance robotics programming, I exercised my legal rights and refused to deliver the program. They lost money exponentially higher than the fair amount of my wages.
Seems like the is-ought fallacy to me… that is, IF you weretrying to make that an argument. Of course, I realize that many people seem tothink there is such a thing as intellectual property. However, the fact thatpeople think so doesn’t have much persuasive value for me. You can see theresources I listed for George if you’re interested.
Don't even get me started on just price theory or the "fair wage" thing....
Funny how General Motors went bankrupt and I never did. The price of their product kept going up because they were too "Goliath" to consider their spaghetti code was costing them dearly. Their robots had a 4% failure rate on an MVSS test. But like eternal salvation, some just don't get it........
I'm not sure what you're point is. Is that an argument for just price theory? If so, how? Can you spell it out?
V. Rather than get into a debate about intellectual property rights, (your reply didn’t give any real arguments to the contrary) I’ll just point out where you can find arguments against them and, if you’re interested, you can study for yourself and decide whether you agree or not. (see here http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Property-Stephan-Kinsella/dp/B001DTHFWS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259341896&sr=8-1 , here http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Monopoly-Michele-Boldrin/dp/0521879280/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259341939&sr=1-1 , here http://mises.org/media/4255 , here http://mises.org/story/3631 , and here http://mises.org/daily/2632 )
You wasted your time posting this since I'm not going to read it. I don't waste my time with idiocy. The worker is entitled to the produce of his labor -- period.
Of course, I realize that many people seem to think there is such a thing as intellectual property.
The Bible says it is the glory of God to conceal a matter and the glory of kings to search it out. I will state that all intellect belongs to God. However profit from refined intellect should reside for a time with those who do the work. All of your Austrian economists would agree with that. That is why drug companies in the USA have exclusivity to their newly formulated medications. The copyright laws had a good intent but have been expanded beyond the original principle. The whole Doc Savage vs Blackmask lawsuit was a travesty.
When Charles Schultz died you saw a marketing blitz of the Peanuts franchise. That makes sense. I just never understood why heirs would cap a well when the commodity is at it's hottest. In theory, the Native Americans were correct in saying no man can own the land. But in reality someone must hold title to the land or no one will plow, sow or harvest.
Allow me to expand a bit by relating a couple of true stories.
A fellow member of several scholarly e-mail lists who teaches in a seminary and has some works published in Logos format suggested that I give him my license to LSJ in exchange for his providing me with TLG disk. I told him that were I to do that I would need to provide him with my license and I don't think I could look in the mirror nor did I think he could. Obviously I was trying to be kind since he apparently had no compunctions regarding it since he had done so with someone else previously. This is why it is now necessary for Logos to synchronize your licenses (especially in L4); they had to protect their intellectutal property rights. We had some spam in the old newsgroups touting a program to break any protection scheme. Apparently there are others who think there are no rights to intellectual property. Would you be one who would seize the opportunity to use Logos resources without paying for the right to do so? I hope your thoughts do not get put into practice though that is usually what happens.
I copied my notes and supporting resources and put them on the computer of the minister of a friend of mine since we had been discussing the book of Revelation which I have been working on for a number of years. I emphasized to him that I expected that after he had looked over the material he would delete it. I think he is honest enough to do so though I have no way to enforce it. I viewed it as being similar to lending a friend my car. If this is a one-time event or at least not habitual, I don't see a problem. If, however, I were to allow him to drive my car every day then my insurance company might have some qualms about that relationship. I could have been naive in letting him have access to my licenses, but I do think his honesty is such that he won't take advantage of it. On the other hand, I was surprised when my seminary professor acquaintance made his suggestion.
Don't say this too loudly. Considering the Logos Bible software is "intellectual property", we wouldn't want to scare off further development. The fact you can not get Barclay's Daily Study Bible in Logos format anymore is proof the law views this as real. I would hesitate moving to a country that did not recognize personal (or intellectual) property rights.
When Charles Schultz died you saw a marketing blitz of the Peanuts franchise. That makes sense. I just never understood why heirs would cap an oil well when a commodity is at it's hottest. In theory, the Native Americans were correct in saying no man can own the land. But in reality someone must hold title to the land or no one will plow, sow or harvest.
44 "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
Of course, I always found the man's action a bit questionable, but perhaps I'm a bit hypersensitive in that regard. He failed to disclose a material fact to the owner of the property when he purchased it.
I may be mistaken but doesn't disclosure on a purchase only apply to the seller? I sold a Gibson ES-135 for $200. The buyer did not have to disclose it was worth $1500. When our mayor's friends buy up property, they don't disclose the new interstate highway is going through that corridor.
I don't believe there is any moral obligation to disclose on the buyer's part. That would be where the intellectual property (expertise) of a real estate broker comes in...[:D]
I may be mistaken but doesn't disclosure on a purchase only apply to the seller? I sold a Gibson ES-135 for $200. The buyer did not have to disclose it was worth $1500. When our mayor's friends buy up property, they donn't disclose the new interstate highway is going through that corridor. I don't believe there is any moral obligation to disclose on the buyer's part. That would be where the intellectual property (expertise) of a real estate broker comes in...
I may be mistaken but doesn't disclosure on a purchase only apply to the seller? I sold a Gibson ES-135 for $200. The buyer did not have to disclose it was worth $1500. When our mayor's friends buy up property, they donn't disclose the new interstate highway is going through that corridor.
I don't believe there is any moral obligation to disclose on the buyer's part. That would be where the intellectual property (expertise) of a real estate broker comes in...
Perhaps you're right, but I still feel a bit funny about it. Our character is the only true property we have so it must be protected.
Our character is the only true property we have so it must be protected.
So true, George. Words fitly spoken.
“You wasted your timeposting this since I'm not going to read it. I don't waste my time withidiocy.”
Well I certainly hope you don’t treat every opinion thatdiffers from your own as idiocy. I mean, if you feel justified in such anattitude, then couldn’t I just refer to your own position as idiocy? In fact, Ithink I might try that in this post to prove a point.
“The worker isentitled to the produce of his labor – period.”
I was going to read that sentence, but I’m afraid you’vewasted your time in posting it. You see, I don’t waste my time with idiocy.
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “However profit fromrefined intellect should reside for a time with those who do the work.”
You’re simply begging the question (in the technical sense).Simply reasserting your opinion isn’t going to get us anywhere and since Georgehas already tried that I don’t know why you’re even chiming in. (I also don’ttake head counts.)
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “All of your Austrian economistswould agree with that.”
Apparently not (cf. links).
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “That is why drug companies inthe USA have exclusivity to their newly formulated medications.”
I’m not sure what you’re point is. It also has a lot to dowith the FDA and safety regulation. But have you ever noticed how you can getstore brand Tylenol and Tylenol Tylenol?
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “The copyright laws had a goodintent but have been expanded beyond the original principle.”
I disagree. It seems to me like a simple product of greed. Throughoutthe majority of human history people have functioned fine in producing musicand books without copy right laws, patents, or the notion of “intellectual property.”
Imagine three people on island and one of the persons, manG, becomes the governor (perhaps by coercion, it doesn’t matter). One day, theother two men are trying to get some food from a coconut. Man X figures outthat he can get the coconut open easier if he bangs it with a rock. Man Y seesthis and decides to do the same. Man X figures that he could make money fromhis idea if he could get the “Governor” to declare that the idea of using arock to open a coconut “belongs” to man X. So he persuades the Governor todeclare that man Y must pay man X if he wishes to open coconuts with a rock.Does this seem reasonable to you? It should, because it’s the basic idea behindintellectual property.
(By the way, the letters your using (the language your using)wasn’t your idea. It was someone else’s. I suppose they could copy right it andcharge you money every time you speak/type, by that logic. I suppose they coulddictate who you talk/type to and who you don’t. They could make it so thateverytime you wish to type/talk you have to obtain written permission and pay asmall fee. Sound good? It was their labor or “refined intellect” if you want toget rhetorical.)
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “In theory, the Native Americanswere correct in saying no man can own the land. But in reality someone musthold title to the land or no one will plow, sow or harvest.”
I don’t think scarce resources are analogous to ideas, whichare not scarce resources. So I don’t think your analogy is good or valid.
“Allow me to expand abit by relating a couple of true stories. A fellow member of several scholarly e-mail lists whoteaches in a seminary and has some works published in Logosformat suggested that I give him my license to LSJ in exchange for hisproviding me with TLG disk. I told him that were I to do that Iwould need to provide him with my license and I don't think I could lookin the mirror nor did I think he could. Obviously I was trying to be kindsince he apparently had no compunctions regarding it since he had done so withsomeone else previously. This is why it is now necessary for Logos tosynchronize your licenses (especially in L4); they had to protect theirintellectutal property rights. We had some spam in the old newsgroupstouting a program to break any protection scheme. Apparently there areothers who think there are no rights to intellectual property. Would yoube one who would seize the opportunity to use Logos resources without payingfor the right to do so? I hope your thoughts do not get put into practicethough that is usually what happens. I copied my notes and supporting resources and put them onthe computer of the minister of a friend of mine since we had been discussingthe book of Revelation which I have been working on for a number ofyears. I emphasized to him that I expected that after he had looked overthe material he would delete it. I think he is honest enough to do sothough I have no way to enforce it. I viewed it as being similar tolending a friend my car. If this is a one-time event or at least nothabitual, I don't see a problem. If, however, I were to allow him todrive my car every day then my insurance company might have some qualms aboutthat relationship. I could have been naive in letting him have access tomy licenses, but I do think his honesty is such that he won't take advantage ofit. On the other hand, I was surprised when my seminary professor acquaintancemade his suggestion.”
A fellow member of several scholarly e-mail lists whoteaches in a seminary and has some works published in Logosformat suggested that I give him my license to LSJ in exchange for hisproviding me with TLG disk. I told him that were I to do that Iwould need to provide him with my license and I don't think I could lookin the mirror nor did I think he could. Obviously I was trying to be kindsince he apparently had no compunctions regarding it since he had done so withsomeone else previously. This is why it is now necessary for Logos tosynchronize your licenses (especially in L4); they had to protect theirintellectutal property rights. We had some spam in the old newsgroupstouting a program to break any protection scheme. Apparently there areothers who think there are no rights to intellectual property. Would yoube one who would seize the opportunity to use Logos resources without payingfor the right to do so? I hope your thoughts do not get put into practicethough that is usually what happens.
I copied my notes and supporting resources and put them onthe computer of the minister of a friend of mine since we had been discussingthe book of Revelation which I have been working on for a number ofyears. I emphasized to him that I expected that after he had looked overthe material he would delete it. I think he is honest enough to do sothough I have no way to enforce it. I viewed it as being similar tolending a friend my car. If this is a one-time event or at least nothabitual, I don't see a problem. If, however, I were to allow him todrive my car every day then my insurance company might have some qualms aboutthat relationship. I could have been naive in letting him have access tomy licenses, but I do think his honesty is such that he won't take advantage ofit. On the other hand, I was surprised when my seminary professor acquaintancemade his suggestion.”
I was going to read this… but then I figured “why waste timewith idiocy?” (You know I do like this tactic much better. It’s certainly alot easier. Is this method copy righted? If I have to start paying royalties Imay reconsider.)
[quoteuser="Matthew"] “Don't say this too loudly.Considering the Logos Bible software is "intellectual property", wewouldn't want to scare off further development. The fact you can not getBarclay's Daily Study Bible in Logos format anymore is proof the law views thisas real. I would hesitate moving to a country that did not recognize personal(or intellectual) property rights.”
You’re ability to continue to commit the is-ought fallacyand argue by way of personal anecdote isn’t very impressive.
“The kingdom ofheaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then inhis joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.”
How does this prove the existence of intellectual property?
“Of course, I alwaysfound the man's action a bit questionable, but perhaps I'm a bit hypersensitivein that regard. He failed to disclose a material fact to the owner of theproperty when he purchased it. There are other passages as well whichassume that a man can own property, but I'll not be too prolix.”
Great. Now if you could just find a passage that assumes aman can own intellectual property.
“Again, the kingdomof heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of everykind; 48 when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put thegood into baskets but threw out the bad. 49 So it will be at the endof the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous 50 andthrow them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashingof teeth. "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in searchof fine pearls; 46 on finding one pearl of great value, he went andsold all that he had and bought it.”
I was not going to waste my time by reading this idiocyeither, but then I just got off work so I figured I’d indulge a little.
Sorry, but I don’t see how this proves the existence orlegitimacy of intellectual property.
Let’s ASSUME that these verses prove the legitimacy ofproperty simpliciter. (It doesn’t, but let’s assume it does so I can be as generousas possible with your argument.) Does it thereby prove that all things can be aform of property such that we can say intellectual ideas are a form ofproperty? Of course not, that’s a huge non-sequitur. Basically, you trying tojustify intellectual property by these verses is akin to me trying to justifywomen as a form of property by these verses. If you can figure out why the onewill not work (women), you should be able to see why it won’t work in the otherinstance (intellect).
(By the way, I don’t give anyone the right to read what I’vewritten here unless you mail me five bucks. I take Visa.)
There is nothing a Christian needs to be more scrutinizing about than about his confirmed habits and views. He is too apt to take for granted the Divine approbation of them.
Cowman, L. B. (1925). Streams in the Desert (335). Los Angeles, CA: The Oriental Missionary Society.
Edit: Logos keeps switching to APA style no matter how many times I choose MLA...
“The worker is entitled to the produce of his labor – period.” I was going to read that sentence, but I’m afraid you’ve wasted your time in posting it. You see, I don’t waste my time with idiocy.
“The worker is entitled to the produce of his labor – period.”
I was going to read that sentence, but I’m afraid you’ve wasted your time in posting it. You see, I don’t waste my time with idiocy.
So that is your opinion of scripture that it is idiocy? Read 2 Tim 2.6.
This thread is getting way off topic, both for the intent of this thread and the intent of this forum.
May I kindly, ask that the discussion be taken off-line, to a different discussion forum, or simply dropped.
Apparently you weren't reading my sentence (maybe because you thought it was idiocy), but I said I didn't read the sentence, so how could I have known it was Scripture? Apparently you also didn't read what I said before that, since I also informed you that I was just giving you a dose of your own medicine (for all you know, the links I gave you provided SCRIPTURE in support and therefore YOU would guilty of the same thing!!!) as a reductio ad absurdum.
Anyway, if you'd like to continue this "debate" you can come over to my blog http://perspectivelyspeaking.wordpress.com/ (However, I haven't used that blog in about 2 years and I would no longer endorse everything there. Or if you have your own blog we can take the debate there... although I hope it is conducted a little more rationally.)
I'll respect the request to not post anymore of this here. Any future response will be posted on my blog if necessary.
Many of us quote Lewis frequently. It would be wonderful to be able to search his books, essays, letters, and literary works. I'll say. Trying to find references to little bits like his flatworld metaphor in this stack of paperbacks is hard work. Some of his books are almost reference works. there's a lot of theology in there (even though Lewis denied being theological). You want to quote the guy and you want your quotes to be accurate. Finding the quotes is not an easy thing to do. Yours in Christ John
John,
Do you have a copy of "The C. S. Lewis Index", compiled by Janine Goffar? It's nothing but a huge (670 page) index, so you have to have the books as well, but I've found it to be useful. I found 3 entries on flatlanders, pointing to "Christian Reflections" and "The Weight of Glory".
Hope this helps,
Jim D.
So that is your opinion of scripture that it is idiocy? Read 2 Tim 2.6. Apparently you weren't reading my sentence (maybe because you thought it was idiocy), but I said I didn't read the sentence, so how could I have known it was Scripture? Apparently you also didn't read what I said before that, since I also informed you that I was just giving you a dose of your own medicine (for all you know, the links I gave you provided SCRIPTURE in support and therefore YOU would guilty of the same thing!!!) as a reductio ad absurdum. Anyway, if you'd like to continue this "debate" you can come over to my blog http://perspectivelyspeaking.wordpress.com/ (However, I haven't used that blog in about 2 years and I would no longer endorse everything there. Or if you have your own blog we can take the debate there... although I hope it is conducted a little more rationally.) I'll respect the request to not post anymore of this here. Any future response will be posted on my blog if necessary.
If it were a lengthy piece, I might believe you didn't read it, but don't waste your time trying to convince me that you didn't read a 2 line statement which you ended up quoting. I would have read it even if I didn't want to. You are being disingenuous, and I don't continue discussions with those who are being less than truthful.
Yep, I want that, if anyone is still counting votes.
C.S. Lewis in my Logos library. Yes!
How does that verse go? "Freely you have received so sell it"? Maybe I got that wrong.
I think Logos has a lot to offer the C. S. Lewis copyright holders in the way of anti-piracy protection. Maybe a Logos representative could now convince them to allow digital publication with the promise of cloud-based termination if unauthorized copies are detected.
The longer they wait, the more missed opportunities for sales. I am alive now and want to purchase these titles. Dead people don't read books.I would be happy to have Lewis works sans Narnia.
It's kind of crazy that I can read C. S. Lewis' books online for free, but can't purchase a digital copy.
I developed a desire earlier today to read C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity" but was surprised to learn that it doesn't exist in Logos--from there I found this thread.
I've got the book in hard copy, so I guess I'll read it the hard way...just wish I could leave my digital mark-up/clippings trail in Logos so I'd instantly and continuously benefit from that effort later, long after time has dimmed my recollection of that endeavor.
You can purchase a digital copy - just not for LOGOS. I hope that changes soon.
