bob said, to jim-
>   I'm not going to argue this any further with you, though.

truth be told, you've haven't provided any argumentation anyway.

you ignored jim's main point, to argue some legalistic crap which
jim knows quite well and was never in dispute.

indeed, it is precisely the troubling fact that material which _is_
"in the public domain" in a _legal_ sense, but is only _available_
for sale, because d.p. can't get it out the door, that's the point...

and if you have nothing to say in regard to that point, then it's
probably a good thing that you stop posting replies of any type.

(except that you've illustrated jim's point about d.p. apologists.)

-bowerbird