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