there's one sad fact that jumps out of the recent discussion. i would have expected -- and hoped, too, but _expected_ is really the correct word -- that project gutenberg would be the entity which most consistently and most strongly supports the right of the public to use the public-domain. and no matter how vigorous or broad that use might be, i would have thought project gutenberg would support it. so when i see one of the precious few "officials" from p.g. quoted in a major newspaper as questioning some use of public-domain books as "unethical", it makes me queasy. he's acting as if p.g. owns those books. it doesn't. the _public_ owns those books. the general public. and p.g. should be pointing that out to _everyone_. these rogue republishers should be hiding behind p.g. as their protective shield, just like the hate-speechers look to the a.c.l.u. to protect their freedom of speech... (and even that analogy is flawed, because hate speech is truly ugly, while these rogue republishers are just a minor bother at worst, or -- if you wanted to put a nice polish on them -- good examples of free speech.) so, when asked for his quote, newby should have said, "more power to 'em, that's what public-domain is for." as i have said before, i strongly believe that p.g. should drive these rogue republishers out of the marketplace by offering an alternative under the p.g. "brand-name", to take advantage of the reputation it has duly earned... destroying the rogue republishers in the _marketplace_ is just fine, because it reflects the conscious choices of free individual human beings; that's the way to proceed. but when it comes to the _newspaper_, it is shocking (and sad) to hear p.g. whining about the republishers -- and, even worse, trying to label them as "unethical", in the kind of despicable spin game corporations use, and do not let us forget who owns those newspapers; newby is unwittingly doing their dirty work for them... project gutenberg should be ringing the bell _loudly:_ use of the public-domain is neither illegal nor unethical. you need to rethink your positions... -bowerbird