[John Conway] | | Since de l'Hopital actually paid Bernoulli for the right to publish | some of the latter's results as his, shouldn't we respect their | agreement by continuing to use his name? |
[Julio GC] > > But, John, the story is quite different. L'Hospital did NOT pay > Bernoulli _for the right to publish_ anything at all, and so > there was not such an agreement. >
[John Conway] | | Tell me more, Julio! I wonder where I got this story from? |
Let me address your second remark first. You may have gotten this story from many sources -- since most secondary sources repeat and repeat the same old story time and again, without taking the trouble of checking primary sources. This is what our friend David has called "the expansion of the tradition".
As to the first part, the story is very complex. My short answer just pointed out that it was plainly wrong to state that "L'Hospital actually paid Bernoulli __for the right to publish__ Bernoulli's results as L'H's own results". You will not find such an agreement (as far as I know) within their correspondence. However, if my memory serves me well, you certainly will find an article published in Acta Eruditorum (1704) in which Johann B. "creams" L'H for his piggish attitude. We still find pigs here, there, and everywhere. _La universidad no acorta las orejas y muchos menos ensen~a modales_. So I don't expect to get rid of pigs in the near future.
Kind regards, Julio
PS By the way, los derechos de autor se dividen en intelectuales y patrimoniales. Los intelectuales son intransferibles (en la mayoria de los paises) a menos que uno mienta. M. Jackson posee los derechos patrimoniales de canciones de los Beatles, puede lucrar con ellas. M. Jackson NO posee los derechos intelectuales, esto es, no puede editar un CD que diga "Yesterday" written MJ, instead of Lennon/McCartney despite he paid for the right to use/sell/publish the songs.