Andrew is correct. Mea culpa. Al ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Sly" <sly@victoria.tc.ca> To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:28 AM Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: !@! Re: Re: Real Competition to PG
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Al Haines (shaw) wrote:
Many of PG's very old etexts (which #76 certainly qualifies as) have considerable legalese at both the front and the back. Etexts since about #4000-#5000 have most of it at the back, with only the book's basic info at the front. Old etexts that get cleaned up and reposted have their old legalese removed and replaced with the current material.
Just a small nit-picky clarification here. The early texts had _all_ the legalese at the front, with only a short "End of this Project Gutenberg Etext" line at the end.
See for example: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3999/old/im86b10.txt
--Andrew
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d