Am 03.12.2010 um 13:30 schrieb Joshua Hutchinson:
I think the *scariest* thing about this whole deal is that I keep finding myself agreeing with bowerbird.
1 - Copyright and Public Domain are opposite concepts. Once a work is public domain, you *cannot* get a copyright on it by republishing it. Never said they were the same. I said they were different. But, that was never the point. Neither was copyrighting the work by itself or the work verbatim!
2 - The rogue sellers, while not necessarily nice, are perfectly legal. In fact, there is precedent. I used to go to computer expos all the time back in the 90s and there was always one guys selling CDs full of stuff he downloaded off the Internet. And a PG cd was always there (with the PG boilerplate conveniently missing to get around the trademark). PG offers a service. For free. they could change terms of use any time! Which could include that commercial exploitation is forbidden. Proving it is a different matter.
3 - I also think we should have (we as in PG) "published" everything to Amazon et al as soon as it became obviously this new-fangled ebook reader fad was gonna stick around! :) I also always thought it would have been a good idea (and small income stream) to publish PG texts through a print-on-demand shop like lulu.com. The problem was always finding the time and volunteer to do it.
Now, since I've agreed publically with bowerbird three times, I'm gonna go find my family members and kiss and hug them goodbye, because I'm pretty sure this is the sign of the coming apocalypse. Do not forgot to wash three times, first! ;-))
I hereby give you absolution. regards Keith.