- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Andale Mono font
by N Wolcott 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

I used to have the Andale Mono ttf font, but since I reinstalled windows and Office it has disappeared. Where did it come from ? Font has all distinguishable characters. N Wolcott nwolcott2(a)post.harvard.edu

3 3

Re: [gutvol-d] Canadian and American copyrights
by D. Starner 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

> > Personal Name: Powell, Van. [from old catalog] > > Is it PD in Canada under life+50? Who knows? I've done some > > searching and cannot find any dates for the author. > > If there's any chance this is a pseudonym, then it's public-domain in > Canada (publication+50 rule). So copyright law in Canada is designed to screw the little guys? It's highly unfair to give one author life+50 because she's well known and give another publication+50 because he's not and "there's [some] chance [his name] is a pseudonym". Anyway, I have a hard time believing that the Paul French novels are going to be in the public-domain in Canada in a decade because Isaac Asimov used a pseudonym when writing them. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

2 1

Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 6, Issue 27
by D. Starner 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

> What would you rather do: > > look up the publication dates for 1001 books and the death dates of the > author(s) for a large subset thereof? I don't have to look up death dates. This is as much a complaint that it's different rather than it's messier. > look up just the death dates for < 1001 authors? I found "Oklahoma, and other poems" in my library. It took 30 seconds to verify that it was in the public domain in the US. It took 20 minutes of searching by library staff to find out that he died in 1951. Mind you, any other library in the world would have taken longer or failed to come up with anything, as he used to live in this area and his death date was found in a book of local gravestones. Finding the publication date was worlds easier. You complain that a book you have doesn't have a publication date. In my experience, that's a rarity, and I still fail to find to understand why European publishers do that. If you don't have a publication date, how do you know that it's not a modern edition, and hence has typographical copyright in the EU, or even new editorial content? How do you prove that to the satisfaction of PG, who might have to prove it in court someday? > There are more books than authors. Just by confirming the death dates > for CS Lewis, Charles Dickens, Hans Christian Anderson, Verdi, etc., > gives me the public domain date for multiple books at a go. It's not that simple. Just because Baudelaire died before 1935, doesn't mean the translator for Les Fleurs du Mal died before 1935, nor does it tell you who the translators were. You have to look up the translations of Les Fleurs du Mal, which will usually give you the publications dates, and then look up who the translators were and when they died, and they are much more unlikely to be well documented. If you go through that list, and mark The Flowers of Death as clearable because of when Baudelaire died, it's wrong; you've got to find out when it was translated into English and then when the translator died (much harder than the first.) Honestly, just confirming the death dates for most authors tells you that all of thier works are in the public domain in the US. The exception, works published after their death or still unpublished, are often still under copyright in life+x places, too. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

1 0

Latin quote in Sherlock Holmes
by Andrew Sly 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

For general interest, here's an posting from alt.language.latin which mentioned Project Gutenberg. It's not very complimentry, but it does say that we got the passage in question correct. Andrew Newsgroups: alt.language.latin Date: 2005-01-12 04:06:38 PST James A. Temple wrote: > "August de Man" <audeman apenstaart wanadoo punt nl> wrote in message > news:41e4e2b0$0$47653$cd19a363@news.wanadoo.nl... > >> I wondered about "contemplar", and rightly so, because Dr. Watson >> doesn't > cite Horace quite correctly. It should have been: >> sic solitus: 'populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo >> ipse domi, simul ac nummos contemplor in arca.' >> Search for "nummos contemplar" and it's all about Sherlock Holmes; >> search for "nummos contemplor", and you find the Latin texts. > > Fascinating! The text from which I copied the line attributed to Dr. > Watson was from the Easton Press publication of "The Adventures of > Sherlock Holmes". An excerpt from the title page reads, "A > definitive text, corrected and edited by Edgar W. Smith, ...". I > suppose we shall never know whether Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was > responsible for the errant "letter", followed by an oversight of > Edgar W. Smith or whether Smith made the change himself. The plot > thickens. As a general rule (and you should have learned this in the course of a long life), it is unwise to place too much trust in what you might read on title pages. Simple errors such as this are easily introduced by compositors when reprinting, for example for American editions (which were often pirated). For what it is worth, the Project Gutenberg eText version (and Project Gutenberg are a byword for inaccuracy, mainly due to their choice of editions) has the quotation correctly. They claim to be reproducing the 1887 text, if you can believe that :-)

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 6, Issue 27
by Joshua Hutchinson 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

Ok, and after you move on to Joe Jim Billy Bob, the obscure hill-billy author? While you're busy trying to track down when he died, I simply flipped the book open to page two, looked at the nice number printed there, and checked off "Yep, out of copyright" and moved on to the next book. As David pointed out, there are some circumstances where it can get ugly, but those are fairly rare. The majority of US copyright issues are easier to handle than the majority of Life+XX copyright issues. Josh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wallace J.McLean" <ag737(a)freenet.carleton.ca> To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 6, Issue 27 Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:21:35 -0500 > > I'm being dead serious. > > What would you rather do: > > look up the publication dates for 1001 books and the death dates of the > author(s) for a large subset thereof? > > look up just the death dates for < 1001 authors? > > There are more books than authors. Just by confirming the death dates > for CS Lewis, Charles Dickens, Hans Christian Anderson, Verdi, etc., > gives me the public domain date for multiple books at a go. > > The US law is messy. The fact that it's nice and clean for pre-1923 > imprints doesn't unmessy it. It's a goddamn mess. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From "Joshua Hutchinson" <joshua(a)hutchinson.net> > Date Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:53:17 -0500 > To "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> > Subject re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion > > > Are you being serious? The US law is anything but messy. Instead of > trying to find out exactly when the author died (and that can be harder > than it sounds for obscure authors) or even more fun, all the editors, > illustrators and contributors to a composite work, find out when they > ALL died, take the one that died last .... With the US law, you just > take the printed publication date and add 95 years. It is a > ridiculously long copyright term, true, but it is very easy to > determine. > > Josh > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (Wallace J.McLean) > 2. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (Joshua Hutchinson) > 3. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (D. Starner) > 4. Re: Re: Problem in file retrieval (Philip Baker) > 5. Canadian and American copyrights (Andrew Sly) > 6. Re: Canadian and American copyrights (Robert Shimmin) From: Wallace J.McLean <ag737(a)freenet.carleton.ca> To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject: re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:41:31 -0500 > > > I'm on it, but can only do it considering life+50 and life+70. I don't > have the time to apply the messy US law. I'll post up my results when > they're ready. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From Steve Herber <herber(a)thing.com> > Date Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:17:24 -0800 (PST) > To gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > Subject [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion > > An annotated version of this list with two extra pieces of data would > make an interesting Project Gutenberg web page. I would like to see a > link to the Gutenberg edition and the date the item went into or will > go into the public domain. I think some people will start to see the > negative aspect of the long copyright times at the same time > discovering how > many documents are available from the Project. From: Joshua Hutchinson <joshua(a)hutchinson.net> To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject: re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:53:17 -0500 > > > Are you being serious? The US law is anything but messy. Instead of trying > to find out exactly when the author died (and that can be harder than it > sounds for obscure authors) or even more fun, all the editors, illustrators > and contributors to a composite work, find out when they ALL died, take the > one that died last .... With the US law, you just take the printed > publication date and add 95 years. It is a ridiculously long copyright term, > true, but it is very easy to determine. > > Josh > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wallace J.McLean" <ag737(a)freenet.carleton.ca> > > > > I'm on it, but can only do it considering life+50 and life+70. I don't > > have the time to apply the messy US law. I'll post up my results when > > they're ready. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From Steve Herber <herber(a)thing.com> > > Date Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:17:24 -0800 (PST) > > To gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > > Subject [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion > > > > An annotated version of this list with two extra pieces of data would > > make an interesting Project Gutenberg web page. I would like to see a > > link to the Gutenberg edition and the date the item went into or will > > go into the public domain. I think some people will start to see the > > negative aspect of the long copyright times at the same time > > discovering how > > many documents are available from the Project. > > _______________________________________________ > > gutvol-d mailing list > > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d From: D. Starner <shalesller(a)writeme.com> To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject: re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:11:03 -0800 > > > > The US law is anything but messy. [...] With the US law, you just take the > > printed publication date and add 95 years. > > Everything before 1923 is in the public domain, which is a little > better. The base of US law is simple; everything printed before 1923 > or 95 years old is in the public domain. But there are a lot of books > in the public domain due to quirks and various rules that are hard to > check. There's six or seven different rules you have to apply (for > instance, a book published outside the US that was not registered or > not renewed in the US that was out of copyright in the home nation in > 1998 or whenever the copyright nation signed a copyright agreement (if > later), then it's in the public domain.) In that sense, it's very messy. > -- > ___________________________________________________________ > Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com > http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm From: Philip Baker <phil(a)thalasson.com> To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Re: Problem in file retrieval Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:26:47 +0000 > > > In article <41E379E4.5090603(a)perathoner.de>, Marcello Perathoner > <marcello(a)perathoner.de> writes > > Philip Baker wrote: > > > >> Search engine bots don't usually give a referrer and so they will not > >> see any change. > > > > Thats exactly what I want. Otherwise they would index the bibrec page > > instead of the book. > > > > The user clicking on the search results will get to the bibrec page, where > > she can select a file format and compression. > > > > You listed getting a better Google ranking as one of the aims of the > change. > -- > Philip Baker From: Andrew Sly <sly(a)victoria.tc.ca> To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject: [gutvol-d] Canadian and American copyrights Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:46:29 -0800 (PST) > > > > Re the recent discussion of various copyright regimes... > > Yes, the U.S. was a hold-out through most of the 20th > century, avoiding the major convention (Berne) that > most other Western nations were party to. > > But I would argue that if the U.S. did not have > its unique copyright history, then Project Gutenberg > would be rather a different thing today. > > Neither American or Canadian copyright laws are > "better", they are just different. Each provides > its own problems for those wanting to utilize the > public domain. > > In a life+N regime, it's a little odd if you > find yourself wishing someone had died earlier. > > (Just today, I looked up the dates for a book I was > hoping would be public domain, only to find--the > author died in 1968. Darn.) > > And you also have the uncertain situations. Here is > a description from the LoC of a title that have > availible, if I want it: > > LC Control Number: 32012123 > Type of Material: Text (Book, Microform, Electronic, etc.) > Personal Name: Powell, Van. [from old catalog] > Main Title: The mystery crash, > Published/Created: New York, Chicago, A. L. Burt company [c1932] > Description: 285 p. front. 19 cm. > LC Classification: PZ7.P88 Sk no. 1 > > Is it PD in Canada under life+50? Who knows? I've done some > searching and cannot find any dates for the author. > > > Andrew From: Robert Shimmin <shimmin(a)uiuc.edu> To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Canadian and American copyrights Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 05:11:30 -0600 > > > Many L+?? regimes have provisions for a fixed term when the author's death > date cannot readily be determined. I couldn't tell you if Canada is one of > those jurisdictions. > > -- RS > > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d > > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Canadian and American copyrights
by Wallace J.McLean 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

>From Andrew Sly <sly(a)victoria.tc.ca> > But I would argue that if the U.S. did not have > its unique copyright history, then Project Gutenberg > would be rather a different thing today. Absolutely. PG holds a great number of books which are PD under the general rule, but not PD in life+50 or life+70 countries. > Neither American or Canadian copyright laws are > "better", they are just different. Each provides > its own problems for those wanting to utilize the > public domain. Absolutely, but, assuming no further changes to either US or Canadian law, Canada already has a larger public domain, and will continue to have a larger public domain, and one which grows every January 1st. The US public domain is smaller and frozen for more than another decade. > And you also have the uncertain situations. Here is > a description from the LoC of a title that have > availible, if I want it: This is a major lacuna in the Canadian law; some other countries with life+ regimes have provisions which allow you to assume, in the absence of death-date information, that the work is PD after a certain efflux of time. Probably not long enough to take care of a 1930s-era imprint, though. On the other hand, I've currently got a book in copy.pglaf.org limbo because it doesn't contain a publication or copyright date, and the library information from various libraries give contradictory multiple US and British publication dates ranging from 1919 to 1926. Under Canadian law, I know for a fact that this book is unequivocally in the public domain, with an author who died in 1939. I'm trying to prove the publication date -- which I know to be 1920 from extrinsic sources -- but it's a tough slog to clear. > Personal Name: Powell, Van. [from old catalog] > Is it PD in Canada under life+50? Who knows? I've done some > searching and cannot find any dates for the author. If there's any chance this is a pseudonym, then it's public-domain in Canada (publication+50 rule).

1 0

Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 6, Issue 27
by Wallace J.McLean 12 Jan '05

12 Jan '05

I'm being dead serious. What would you rather do: look up the publication dates for 1001 books and the death dates of the author(s) for a large subset thereof? look up just the death dates for < 1001 authors? There are more books than authors. Just by confirming the death dates for CS Lewis, Charles Dickens, Hans Christian Anderson, Verdi, etc., gives me the public domain date for multiple books at a go. The US law is messy. The fact that it's nice and clean for pre-1923 imprints doesn't unmessy it. It's a goddamn mess. ----- Original Message ----- >From "Joshua Hutchinson" <joshua(a)hutchinson.net> Date Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:53:17 -0500 To "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion Are you being serious? The US law is anything but messy. Instead of trying to find out exactly when the author died (and that can be harder than it sounds for obscure authors) or even more fun, all the editors, illustrators and contributors to a composite work, find out when they ALL died, take the one that died last .... With the US law, you just take the printed publication date and add 95 years. It is a ridiculously long copyright term, true, but it is very easy to determine. Josh Today's Topics: 1. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (Wallace J.McLean) 2. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (Joshua Hutchinson) 3. re: Top 1000 collection list and suggestion (D. Starner) 4. Re: Re: Problem in file retrieval (Philip Baker) 5. Canadian and American copyrights (Andrew Sly) 6. Re: Canadian and American copyrights (Robert Shimmin) _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

1 0

Re: Problem in file retrieval
by Marcello Perathoner 11 Jan '05

11 Jan '05

David Widger wrote: > A new quirk in access to our PG files and not a happy one. A main advantage of > the new directory system is direct access to a file when its url is entered and > until this morning that has been the case. I now find that when a direct link is > entered one is _not_ taken directly to the file but rather to the PG catalog. I > can only imagine this an unintended side effect of some program change. > > For example: > > http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/3/1/7/3176/3176-h/3176-h.htm > > has for the past year taken users directly to Twain's "Innocents Abroad", now it > takes them to the bibrec where they have to choose again from a long confusing > list of files. I cannot reproduce this. Clicking the url in the mail or copy and pasting the url into a browser window gives me the file and not the bibrec. This is related to a recent change in the site programming which I am testing. I redirect all deep links to files from external pages to the bibrec page. This has some advantages: - the link won't go dead when we REPost the file - the user gets a choice of formats - the user doesn't get an outdated edition - our books get a better google ranking - the user gets to see our site. On the downside, sometimes you have to click some more to get the file you want. How does this work? _If_ the browser provides a referrer _and_ the referrer is not from our site, the user gets redirected. When opening the file from a bookmark or entering the url in the location bar, the browser should send _no_ referrer, and the user will not be redirected. When clicking on a link on a page, the browser should send a referrer (can be turned off). The list of "good" referrers, which will never be redirected, contains www.gutenberg.org only, but can be expanded to contain any "Independent Gutenberg Search" site. How did you access the file ? I'd like to try this approach for a few weeks and see if I hit any "hard" problems with it. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster(a)gutenberg.org

3 5

re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion
by Joshua Hutchinson 11 Jan '05

11 Jan '05

Are you being serious? The US law is anything but messy. Instead of trying to find out exactly when the author died (and that can be harder than it sounds for obscure authors) or even more fun, all the editors, illustrators and contributors to a composite work, find out when they ALL died, take the one that died last .... With the US law, you just take the printed publication date and add 95 years. It is a ridiculously long copyright term, true, but it is very easy to determine. Josh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wallace J.McLean" <ag737(a)freenet.carleton.ca> > > I'm on it, but can only do it considering life+50 and life+70. I don't > have the time to apply the messy US law. I'll post up my results when > they're ready. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From Steve Herber <herber(a)thing.com> > Date Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:17:24 -0800 (PST) > To gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > Subject [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion > > An annotated version of this list with two extra pieces of data would > make an interesting Project Gutenberg web page. I would like to see a > link to the Gutenberg edition and the date the item went into or will > go into the public domain. I think some people will start to see the > negative aspect of the long copyright times at the same time > discovering how > many documents are available from the Project. > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion
by Wallace J.McLean 11 Jan '05

11 Jan '05

I'm on it, but can only do it considering life+50 and life+70. I don't have the time to apply the messy US law. I'll post up my results when they're ready. ----- Original Message ----- >From Steve Herber <herber(a)thing.com> Date Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:17:24 -0800 (PST) To gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject [gutvol-d] Top 1000 collection list and suggestion An annotated version of this list with two extra pieces of data would make an interesting Project Gutenberg web page. I would like to see a link to the Gutenberg edition and the date the item went into or will go into the public domain. I think some people will start to see the negative aspect of the long copyright times at the same time discovering how many documents are available from the Project.

1 0