- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: [BP] monday morning quarterback -- #01
by Cori 06 Mar '06

06 Mar '06

On 3/6/06, Bowerbird(a)aol.com wrote: > i've started a new weekly "series" on best-practices > for people digitizing e-books from paper-books... > you don't have to be a member of the "bpsuper" yahoogroup > in order to read the messages. but if yahoogroups gives you > an allergic reaction nonetheless, the issue is also posted here: If however, it's Bowerbird's writing that gives you an allergic reaction, but you have some reading time free, you'd be welcome to drop by the Distributed Proofreaders' Smoothreading Pool, where a wide variety of complete books can be read, prior to their final Project Gutenberg upload & archiving. http://www.pgdp.net/c/tools/post_proofers/smooth_reading.php You don't have to be a member of DP to visit and download books to read! If you'd like to add comments (by editing the text and leeving [*typo: leaving?] notes,) you would need to create a new account in order to upload your edited copy. As a post-processor, I greatly appreciate the people who have found time to smooth-read my books - they pick out things I just couldn't find any other way, and every little query raised and checked is one less thing for errata @ PG to worry about in 42 years time :) Have fun, Cori

1 0

monday morning quarterback #01 is now up
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 06 Mar '06

06 Mar '06

"monday morning quarterback", #01, is up... "m.m.q." is my new weekly "series" on best-practices for people digitizing e-books from paper-books... issue #1 is now available at the "bpsuper" listserve: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bpsuper/message/3 you don't have to be a member of the "bpsuper" yahoogroup in order to read the messages. but if yahoogroups gives you an allergic reaction nonetheless, the issue is also posted here: > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/mmq/mmq01.txt learn what this "monday morning quarterback" says you are doing wrong, and what you're doing right... -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Sweat of brow
by Wallace J.McLean 06 Mar '06

06 Mar '06

----- Original Message ----- >From Greg Newby <gbnewby(a)pglaf.org> Date Sat, 4 Mar 2006 13:45:33 -0800 To Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject Re: [gutvol-d] Sweat of brow >> Quaere; does "edition" or "typographical arrangement" copyright >> subsist in PG e-texts, in countries which recognize those types of >> copyright? > > Short answer: we only try to follow US laws, and I'm unaware > of anything like this provision in the US. Yes, but even if there were, ***the copyright status of a PG work in another country*** is determined by the national law of that country, not of the US. > It might be this type of copyright (or whatever it might be called) > would play a role in the EU and elsewhere...though in practice, if a > physical book is old enough to be public domain based on author's death > date, probably any typography copyright has also expired. Yes, but that's missing the point of typographical or edition copyright: a new typographical arrangement or edition of the work, in that form, has a copyright attached to it. Not the work, the typographical arrangement or edition of it. PG is infringing neither the copyright in the work nor the copyright in the typographical arrangement; but the PG edition may have copyright status in a country that DOES recognize typographical arrangements or editions, subject to national treatment and shorter-term provisions in that country's national law.

5 4

let's sweat -- i.s.b.n. anyone?
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 05 Mar '06

05 Mar '06

i.s.b.n. are relatively cheap in lots of 10,000... howsabout y'all buy enough for your library? and has there been any progress on putting your free versions of your e-texts into google? or would you just rather wring your hands and shake your fists at the people reselling them? if you want your distribution to be "unlimited", these are some simple steps that you can take. -bowerbird p.s. issue 1 of "monday morning quarterback" will go up tomorrow, in case you were wondering.

1 0

Sweat of brow
by Wallace J.McLean 04 Mar '06

04 Mar '06

>> AFAIK the copyright notice is valid, but only applies to the page and line >> layout plus cover layout of the new paper edition, not the PG text. Not >> that they would tell you that. > Not in our opinion (which has been vetted by several expert > copyright lawyers): > No Sweat of the Brow Copyright > http://www.gutenberg.org/howto/sweat-no-c Not sure about in the US, but the case law, at least when I researched it about 7 or 8 years ago, was still unsettled in Canada and other commonwealth countries. I don't know off hand that that situation has changed. In the UK, most if not all EU countries, and much of the Commonwealth - - though not in Canada -- there is also an express provision protecting "editions" or "typographical arrangements". The term is generally shorter than full copyright, and of course they aren't exclusive. You can prepare another edition or typographical arrangement of Shakespeare in the UK, you just can't republish an exact copy of someone else's in the first 25 years after publication. Quaere; does "edition" or "typographical arrangement" copyright subsist in PG e-texts, in countries which recognize those types of copyright?

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] Commercial paper editions of PG texts
by Joshua Hutchinson 01 Mar '06

01 Mar '06

> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Fawthrop" <hyphen(a)hyphenologist.co.uk> > To: gbnewby(a)pglaf.org, "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> > Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Commercial paper editions of PG texts > Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:18:22 +0000 > > > |> > |> AFAIK the copyright notice is valid, but only applies to the page and line > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > |> layout plus cover layout of the new paper edition, not the PG text. Not > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > |> that they would tell you that. > | > |Not in our opinion (which has been vetted by several expert > |copyright lawyers): > | > | No Sweat of the Brow Copyright > | http://www.gutenberg.org/howto/sweat-no-c > > Which is what I said :-( If I understand it right, there is no separate layout copyright in the US (which is the law PG operates under). So, no, the copyright notice is not valid because there is no copyright available for layout. Josh

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Commercial paper editions of PG texts
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Mar '06

01 Mar '06

marcello said: > Why do you require ethical behaviour from > Google and not from those other publishers? it's folly to try to "require ethical behaviour" from _anyone_ in the publishing industry... but nobody's doing any "unethical" anyway... as i pointed out just now, the copyright issue has absolutely no bearing on viewability of any pages. if you think google should display the pages of a public-domain title without any restrictions, then all you need to do is submit it to their program... heck, the first book i would submit would be "books and culture", the public-domain title that google made available as its first example. you can see my reworking of this title right now: > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/mabie/mabie.html > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/mabie/mabiep001.html and when i submitted my .pdf to their program, i would even leave in the "google print" stamp that they put on each page, just as a little joke... these scans actually came from "google library", now known as "google book search", and not the "google print" program, which is the one geared towards commercial publishers, but google was a little casual with their project-names early on. and now i don't think anyone is very clear about where one program ends and another begins, not even google... but i just looked, and the program is indeed free: > http://books.google.com/intl/en/googlebooks/publisher.html so if you want unfettered titles in the program, the only thing you need to do is take action... by the way, here's my mabie example for displaying a scan-book: > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/mabie/mabied002003.html readers will find my interface more pleasant than the google one: > http://books.google.com/books?id=yGZZXIrbUKQC&pg=PA5 > They didn't even proof-read the text, > or they would have noticed those errors. this is so funny it's not even funny... :+) -bowerbird p.s. yes, "monday morning quarterback" _is_ late, but it's coming...

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Commercial paper editions of PG texts
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Mar '06

01 Mar '06

bruce said: > It's a shame that they are able to hide a PD > book behind a copyrighted cover. major publishing houses do it all the time with p-books. and there's nothing wrong with it legally. or even "morally". most especially if they're delivering hardcopy. paper doesn't grow on trees. (ha ha, i funny!) (i would agree that it would be kind of sleazy to charge people for an electronic-copy, especially if all they got was a download, not an actual c.d. then again, if p.g. wasn't getting free hosting from ibiblio, and they had to pay for all the bandwidth...) *** again, there is nothing to "report". what they're doing is (a) perfectly legal, and (b) a service to their customers. if we want to give people an unrestricted view of the pages, we need to submit the book to the program and specify that. i'll get around to doing it myself sooner or later, providing google doesn't charge publishers to get their titles listed... but it's really something i think p.g. should do, systematically. not that anyone gives a flying burrito what i think p.g. should do. *** greg said: > If the books are in there because the publisher added them > and the publisher claims they are under copyright > there is nothing you can do to change it. i don't think you have to claim the text is under copyright to restrict viewing access on any or even all of your pages. like i said, our job is to submit books to the program that have _no_ restrictions on their viewing. that will serve to drive some of the parasites from the scene, but have little negative effect on the people who are offering a _service_ to end-users by giving them a hard-copy option. (indeed, visibility might have a positive effect on those businesses.) another question is whether project gutenberg wants to get in the hard-copy business itself. p.g. could probably make a little bit of money doing it, or maybe lose a little, because it ain't always easy to satisfy the general public, but either way, i don't see any volunteers for the task... (as branko will tell you, it can take a few hours of work to get an e-text into the shape where you could feel good offering it for sale, and that means a heckuva lot of work for a library that stands at 18,000+ e-texts and growing. of course, if the e-texts had been formatted consistently, it'd be a piece of cake to get them into publication shape. that's one reason i've hollered so long about consistency.) you wouldn't _have_to_ get into the hard-copy business in order to _list_ the titles so that people could view your pages without restriction. you could just specify a cost of $8,000 per title, and probably drive away any customers. (and if you did get a customer, it would be worth it, not?) but meanwhile, the pages would be sitting there, viewable. -bowerbird

1 0

Commercial paper editions of PG texts
by Marcello Perathoner 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Lately I've been using Google Book Search to check error reports against paper editions I don't have. It turns out that some of the more embarrassing errors in PG texts turn up in many commercial paper editions. See: http://books.google.com/books?q=%22but+stating+it+to+be+such+as+such+as+mig… http://books.google.com/books?q=%22what+has+been+sometimes+been+found+befor… All you need is a TeX installation and some imagination to write a real good copyright notice. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster(a)gutenberg.org

1 0

while you're waiting
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 27 Feb '06

27 Feb '06

while you're waiting for "monday morning quarterback"... this page will remind you what my idea of "continuous proofreading" would look like: > http://users.aol.com/bowerbird/proof_wiki.html basically, it's the traditional "proofing" interface, with the scan on one side, the text on the other. if someone spots an error, they can report it using the form right on the page, which adds the report instantly to the bottom of the page. that kind of transparency means that end-users don't "wonder" if an error was already reported, because they see each and every one reported... (the disposition of each report will be posted too, so people don't keep repeating the same report...) the reports are also collected on a separate page, sortable by report-date and page-in-the-book, so administrators get a quick-and-easy overview... of course, text has to be fairly clean before you can put it into "continuous proofreading" like this, but i anticipate i can take most o.c.r. to an accuracy of 1-error-per-10-pages, using my clean-up tools, an acceptable rate for continuous proofreading... -bowerbird

1 0