----- Original Message -----
>From "D. Starner" <shalesller(a)writeme.com>
Date Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:41:44 -0800
To "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org>
Subject Re: [gutvol-d] Bibliographic data
"Wallace J.McLean" writes:
>> The benefit, of course, is that once the death date of an author is
>> conclusively determined, then, barring wrinkles like collaborators,
>> translators, co-authors, illustrators, and posthumous publication,
all
>> of that author's works are, by definition, cleared.
>The catch is, you don't get to bar wrinkles like that. You have to deal
>with them. By the same rule of thumb, any book printed before 1923 is,
>by definition, cleared. Go US!
And they are dealwithable on the basis of intrinsic evidence, intrinsic
to the book.
I'll take a post-1923 public domain any day, thank you very much. I'm
currently working on the oeuvres of an author who died in 1939, so that
the text, at least, of all his books, are public domain in Canada.
(Some of the illustrations are by an illustrator who died in the 1970s;
the illustrations aren't clearable, but can be excised.)
However, about half of his works are post-1923 imprints. Boo, U.S.
>> However, since third parties must also
>> rely on the term of copyright rules to determine what they, as third
>> parties, are entitled to do with a work, it would be unfair to the
>> public if they (we) were estopped from using an ancient work simply
>> because no one knew who the author was, to calculate the term, to
>> decide whether the work is public domain or not.
>In other words, there has to be special exceptions in the law because
>it's messier than just printed by date.
The US "just printed by date" rule won't be around forever: assuming no
further changes in the US law, you'll have to start dealing with many
of the same questions starting in 2019... and you'll STILL have a
smaller public domain to play with.
> There is a grand total of one book that I've looked into and not been
able
> to definitely pin down a publication date, and that was cleared
anyway.
You've been extremely lucky. In my personal library, I'd say 5 to 10
percent of my historical collection has indeterminate publication dates.
> I can walk the shelves of my library and check to see whether most
books
> are in the public domain just by opening the cover. I can't do that
with
> a life+years system; in that case, I have to remember when they died.
And you still have to do that for every single book; you can't batch-
clear.
> A American imprint without a date is in the public domain so long as
you
> can prove it was printed before 1989. Go US!
I'm not certain that's a correct statement of the law. Are you?
>> I'm assuming, for the sake of argument, that it is. Translators? New
>> editions? Typographical arrangements? I'm blind to them for the
purpose
>> of this analysis. Do they have an impact on what PG or anyone else
can
>> do with those works? Yes. Do I care? Not for the purpose of this
little
>> thought-experiment, no.
>Then you're stacking the deck. Anyone can win if they do that.
Not at all. I'm just making my life easier. Why are you being a prick?
>>> 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
>> Or works published after 1922.
>No, most authors died before 1923 and hence anything published after
1922 is
>in the public domain.
Oh?
Tell that to the PG clearance team.
> It's easier just to skip the whole thing altogether. If you're doing
> this for PG, the question shouldn't be what's easier, it should be
> what's useful to PG, which is US copyright law and publication dates.
I'm doing it for me.
Someone else can do it for PG under US law. Are you volunteering?
Thanks.
