Jump to content

Talk:Cory Doctorow

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EBY3221 (talk | contribs) at 01:02, 17 June 2014 (Cory Doctorow and Creative Commons: response). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:WAP assignment

Books and Countries

I'm not a regular editor and please excuse me if I'm going about this wrong, but I'm curious about how the countries are chosen for Doctorow's books. Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom is listed as Canadian but most of the others are of the United States. Why are the books of Canadian born author living in London considered to be of the United States? Maybe it's a publishing thing but if it's an issue with the wikipedia pages I feel they should be addressed. And I probably won't be following up on this, it's just something I think should be brought to your attention. --12:05, 30 March 2013 (PST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.144.186 (talk)

"Doctorow's Law"

Has this "law" become well known enough to be given a name? It's hardly a Murphy's or Sod's. The same question about "metacrap" too, "popularised" ? In what way is it popular? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.181.67.82 (talk) 18:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doctorow's law:
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/cory-doctorow/article/44012-doctorow-s-first-law.html
http://www.utne.com/media/cory-doctorow-copyright-activist-reform-boingboing.aspx
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2014/feb/05/digital-rights-management?CMP=twt_gu
https://www.siggraph.org/s2011/for_media/siggraph-2011-selects-cory-doctorow-keynote-speaker
http://siggraphmediablog.blogspot.com/2011/08/siggraph-keynote-cory-doctorow-speaks.html
http://rhizome.org/editorial/2011/aug/12/cory-doctorows-siggraph-2011-keynote/
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140206/10323526118/drm-is-right-to-make-up-your-own-copyright-laws.shtml
http://2014.penguicon.org/cory-doctorow-returns-for-penguicon-2014/
Metacrap:
http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Metacrap%22
http://www.well.com/~doctorow/metacrap.htm
http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i202/f12/node/80
http://www.wired.com/2007/05/metacrap_and_fl/
--Guy Macon (talk) 23:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply regarding the "law", though half your links don't mention it and the rest are written by Cory. However, this wiki article is of course not important enough to warrant further time on such trivia, I'll leave it in your hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.146.150.181 (talk) 10:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cory Doctorow and Creative Commons

User:EBY3221 :

"Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom, Doctorow's first novel, was published in January 2003, and was the first novel released under one of the Creative Commons licences, allowing readers to circulate the electronic edition as long as they neither made money from it nor used it to create derived works. The electronic edition was released simultaneously with the print edition. In March 2003, it was re-released with a different Creative Commons licence that allowed derivative works such as fan fiction, but still prohibited commercial usage."

The reference footnotes to only Doctorow's Creative Commons licensed works, (most without wikipedia entries) describes the chronological and subject scope of his Creative Commons licensing. Template:Gutenberg author and Jane Austen are not relevant for this case. The [Wikipedia:Spam]] guidelines do not apply to non-commercial non-anonymous non-self-promotion links.

User:EBY3221, Please defend your repeated undos.Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 00:41, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The appropriate place to put a link to the electronic, downloadable collection of an author's work is in the "external links" section of the article. What your edit did was put "Download free copies..." at several reference points incorrectly. See ref 17 & 18 on this edit. To my mind, and other editors may disagree, that's a form of Citation spam because it does nothing to verify article content, just populates links over and over to the same two sites. But assuming good faith, and I deeply apologize for clearly not doing so earlier- that is out of character for me, - it's still not proper use of citations. One added point - I only "undid" once. The second edit was a stop, look, and research - I moved the Gutenberg link to the top of the external refs, double-checked & corrected its format, and added a library search of Doctorow's works. EBY (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]