I would assume that the first photo's rights were purchased for publication in Britain, and possibly elsewhere -- a Europe-all break is typical -- but not worldwide publication rights and not North American rights. It seems pretty clear. (Quite possibly/probably "internet rights" were not specifically bought.)
It's less mysterious-seeming if one has experience with book contracts, though it's also possible that since I'm rather out-of-date on such I'm all wrong somehow.
Or, allowing for the lack of hits from this, probably not (not a lot of buys for Susanna here, I guess; oh, well, dear).
What I'm reminded of that I've forgotten to mention 300 times is that you (whomever controls the HTML: Ogged?) might really want to -- which is to say I request -- you include the time of a comment. "Thanks" as we say.
I'll mention this five hundred times until you do it: be warned, and let's get that out of the way.
Well, Gary, I didn't see the article, because I'm a slave to my RSS reader, and your RSS feed isn't for full posts, so if the first sentence of your post doesn't grab my attention, there's a good chance I won't read it...yes, I know, don't bother scolding me.
And I kind of like the timelessness of our comments. Of course, the system does note the time, so if you ever need to know, for a lawsuit say, I can provide the information...
Should it be? I'm too computationally, which is to say electronically, which is to say financially, ill-equipped to be able to deal well with this "RSS" thingie; I can barely manage to peddle fast enough to get posts out onto the HTTP. I figured RSS feeds are better short than full, but I'll take requests and feedback.
Well, I prefer to get the full post, because then I don't have to leave my RSS reader--generally, I've found that sites that don't make the full feed available want you to visit to see ads. In any case, if you decide to publish full posts, this seems to be how.
Hey, I figured people know how to twitch their goddammed fingers. But if you say people using RSS -- which I persist in thinking of in terms of Indian terrorism and history, but never mind -- can't manage it, since I've no contrarian requests, your request for full post feeds is apt to win. You lazy bastards.
Twitch and now you'll have no excuse not to link to me.
Could we back this mutual kindness back up about a week?
Didn't this "buzzy" book come out about a year ago? I read it but was tired by the end -- it's long. The first third of it and any scene involving the Duke of Wellington were good. The rest is blurry.
I would assume that the first photo's rights were purchased for publication in Britain, and possibly elsewhere -- a Europe-all break is typical -- but not worldwide publication rights and not North American rights. It seems pretty clear. (Quite possibly/probably "internet rights" were not specifically bought.)
It's less mysterious-seeming if one has experience with book contracts, though it's also possible that since I'm rather out-of-date on such I'm all wrong somehow.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 09- 4-04 5:57 PM
You probably saw the article I linked to here, by the way.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 09- 4-04 7:15 PM
Or, allowing for the lack of hits from this, probably not (not a lot of buys for Susanna here, I guess; oh, well, dear).
What I'm reminded of that I've forgotten to mention 300 times is that you (whomever controls the HTML: Ogged?) might really want to -- which is to say I request -- you include the time of a comment. "Thanks" as we say.
I'll mention this five hundred times until you do it: be warned, and let's get that out of the way.
Now, on to girl singers we both like....
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 09- 5-04 2:20 PM
Well, Gary, I didn't see the article, because I'm a slave to my RSS reader, and your RSS feed isn't for full posts, so if the first sentence of your post doesn't grab my attention, there's a good chance I won't read it...yes, I know, don't bother scolding me.
And I kind of like the timelessness of our comments. Of course, the system does note the time, so if you ever need to know, for a lawsuit say, I can provide the information...
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09- 5-04 2:51 PM
"...your RSS feed isn't for full posts...."
Should it be? I'm too computationally, which is to say electronically, which is to say financially, ill-equipped to be able to deal well with this "RSS" thingie; I can barely manage to peddle fast enough to get posts out onto the HTTP. I figured RSS feeds are better short than full, but I'll take requests and feedback.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 09- 7-04 3:18 PM
Well, I prefer to get the full post, because then I don't have to leave my RSS reader--generally, I've found that sites that don't make the full feed available want you to visit to see ads. In any case, if you decide to publish full posts, this seems to be how.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09- 7-04 3:24 PM
Hey, I figured people know how to twitch their goddammed fingers. But if you say people using RSS -- which I persist in thinking of in terms of Indian terrorism and history, but never mind -- can't manage it, since I've no contrarian requests, your request for full post feeds is apt to win. You lazy bastards.
Twitch and now you'll have no excuse not to link to me.
Could we back this mutual kindness back up about a week?
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 09- 7-04 8:47 PM
Didn't this "buzzy" book come out about a year ago? I read it but was tired by the end -- it's long. The first third of it and any scene involving the Duke of Wellington were good. The rest is blurry.
Posted by bill | Link to this comment | 11-23-05 7:14 AM