Newly Enlightened,
"IF Ray & Cynthia would have wanted Ray's books available to world to do whatever anyone wanted to do with it, they would have.
BUT THEY DIDN'T
they entrusted a dear friend of theirs to protect his life work. Mike & I trust that decision and will do whatever we can to help her keep it Ray's work and not get some website slapped on it like a brand or advertisement."
My argument has nothing to do with Ray's work being used to advertise or promote another group's agenda, and I am sorry to hear that such a thing may have been done. Maybe I can illustrate my point more clearly with an analogy that rebel8 started.
Let's say you decide that you want to go out to dinner. When you get there, however, the restaurant is closed. Standing outside the door is a bus boy with a plate of left over food from that night. He says, "The chef gave me this food. I will sell it to you for menu price." Would you buy it?
As I have stated, I hope that the individual who is publishing and selling the book will do so at a minimal price to cover their costs and the time invested in printing. If this is the route that they are going, it seems that open-access may be a simpler, more effective manner for getting the work out.
Otherwise(please correct me if you see another interpretation), the individual is looking to profit off the books, and in my opinion that is wrong. You say that you trust the decision that Ray made in passing the book on, and I respect that you have such a trust for a person like Ray. I am more dubious, however, and only trust things that can be plainly seen. I hope that the the entire situation works out for the best of the owner and the community.