Jonathon Blake wrote:

> a) I doubt that Adobe/O'Reilly could recoup the cost of the offer
> within five years. [O'Reilly has a policy of flipping all books to a
> CC 2.0 Licence five years after publication.]
>
> b) I don't know what sort of royalty arrangement Peter has, but I
> expect that financially, it is much better than any royalty
> arrangement that involves the CC 2.0 Licence.
>

I don't know about the CC policy - never heard that - where are all the
old books? There are some I would download in a minute! Hmm, just looked
at the web site : http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/

Looks like it is always the author's choice, and then only for already
out of print books.

But I think you missed my bigger points:

1 - Adobe would provide the majority of funding, probably for the same
reasons and from a similar budget that Ken Lunde and his team have been
paid from for about 10 years or more. Their justification is that that
it is R and D that turns into products and features.

2 - Similarly, O'Reilly has more then books to make money. they do
conferences and just generally evangelize OS software, run many web
sites, and explore emerging distribution models. They probably get paid
for feedback. They certainly publish some books that they may not get a
return on, for both the opportunity to document features and for
prestige. Lunde's books are a good example. They are probably the most
expensive books to publish they have ever done.

I can easily imagine O'Reilly/Adobe sponsoring a online Wiki with
images/pdfs of samples and more. Once that is under way, there are lots
of ways to monetize it, or none at all, but the cost could be low.

In this case I can see a joint effort as likely the best way to go. I
think Peter has made clear from past posts that money is an issue for
him at times. If any deal were worked out at all, I am sure it would
lessen those pressures for him.

Or for anyone else here who might think this is a good idea ;)

Best,

Barry