On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:33:22PM +0000, Jon Ingram wrote:
On 12/18/05, Jim Tinsley <jtinsley@pobox.com> wrote:
I'm with Josh and Andrew. _If_ the audio is made from the same edition as ours, it's just a new format of that number. In some previous cases, the producer of the computer-read file claimed copyright, and that's why Greg gave them new numbers, because we couldn't post both copyrighted and PD content under the same number, even though it was made from the same source text. We also said we'd replace them when the technology improved.
If we don't know that the audio is from the same edition, then it should get a new number.
Sounds very sensible. In the case of all the Librivox projects I've been involved with, they've definitely been based on specific PG texts -- see http://librivox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=376 for an example.
Librivox also explicity releases all the material it records back into the public domain, rather than retaining any rights over it.
I didn't know this -- I thought they kept a copyright with a creative commons-style license. Thanks for setting me straight. Mixing public domain with copyrighted items in the same eBook # is something I'd (still) like to avoid. So: Yes, we can just put these public domain audio performances in with the other formats. That makes the job slightly more difficult: for pre-10K items, it would be best to go ahead and update them for post-10K. (Not 100% required, but it would be nice -- otherwise, it's leaving a mess for someone to clean up in the future. Remember that the etext?? directories do *not* have subdirectories, making the post-10K structure much more suitable for multi-file audio eBooks.) For post-10K items it's a little simpler...just adding in the files. -- Greg