Re: [gutvol-d] Format for corrections to etexts
--- Tom Harris <beacybooks@bigpond.com> wrote:
Can someone point me to documentation for the format for submitting corrections to an existing etext?
There isn't a prescribed format as such, but see the FAQ for suggestions: http://www.gutenberg.org/faq/R-26.php If there's an email address in the header for the producer, send it there, else to errata_AT_pglaf.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
I have a question relation to correcting a pre-1923 edition with a post 1923 edition. I know that where the corrections are minor this is OK. But what if the post-1923 edition adds a few footnotes to the text, by an editor. Are these OK to add in? In addition, what happens if the pre-1923 edition is a severely edited version of the true work, which, although written in the 1860's, only saw publication in full in the 1960's. I realise that the new introduction, notes etc. by the editor cannot be included, but is the text OK? These questions occurred to me as I examined the 3 editions of the Autobiography of Charles Darwin. His views on religion were so distasteful to his family that they were elided from the text, and not available in print for a century! Regards Tom Harris BeacyBooks beacybooks@bigpond.com
On 5/6/05, Tom Harris <beacybooks@bigpond.com> wrote:
I have a question relation to correcting a pre-1923 edition with a post 1923 edition.
Assuming, in my response, that the post-1923 edtion is out of copyright, or at least will be treated that way.
I know that where the corrections are minor this is OK. But what if the post-1923 edition adds a few footnotes to the text, by an editor. Are these OK to add in?
No. Definitly not.
In addition, what happens if the pre-1923 edition is a severely edited version of the true work, which, although written in the 1860's, only saw publication in full in the 1960's. I realise that the new introduction, notes etc. by the editor cannot be included, but is the text OK?
No. If it only saw publication in the 1960's, the clock on the copyright on that text started in the 1960s.
David, Thanks for the concise reply. This means that the1960's text will be OK if hosted in a country with life+70 copyright, such as Australia, since the original author is well dead. Is this correct? Regards Tom Harris BeacyBooks beacybooks@bigpond.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Starner" <prosfilaes@gmail.com> To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 12:19 AM Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] OK to correct a text with post-1923 editions? On 5/6/05, Tom Harris <beacybooks@bigpond.com> wrote:
I have a question relation to correcting a pre-1923 edition with a post 1923 edition.
Assuming, in my response, that the post-1923 edtion is out of copyright, or at least will be treated that way.
I know that where the corrections are minor this is OK. But what if the post-1923 edition adds a few footnotes to the text, by an editor. Are these OK to add in?
No. Definitly not.
In addition, what happens if the pre-1923 edition is a severely edited version of the true work, which, although written in the 1860's, only saw publication in full in the 1960's. I realise that the new introduction, notes etc. by the editor cannot be included, but is the text OK?
No. If it only saw publication in the 1960's, the clock on the copyright on that text started in the 1960s. _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
On 5/6/05, Tom Harris <beacybooks@bigpond.com> wrote:
David,
Thanks for the concise reply. This means that the1960's text will be OK if hosted in a country with life+70 copyright, such as Australia, since the original author is well dead. Is this correct?
I believe most life+70 countries give 70 years of copyright to anything first published after the author's death, or at least did. According to Wikipedia, the 1960's text would have got 50 years copyright, plus another 20 since it was under copyright when the extensions went through.
David,
Thanks for the concise reply. This means that the1960's text will be OK if hosted in a country with life+70 copyright, such as Australia, since the original author is well dead. Is this correct?
I believe most life+70 countries give 70 years of copyright to anything first published after the author's death, or at least did. According to Wikipedia, the 1960's text would have got 50 years copyright, plus another 20 since it was under copyright when the extensions went through.
At least in the Commonwealth, the copyright regime used to be life+50, or 50 years for posthumous and anonymous works. But it has become fashionable of late to (1) do away with the fixed-term protection for posthumous works; and (2) extend copyright terms another 20 years. Depending on the order in which these operations were applied, and other details that vary from country to country, a posthumous edition published in the 1960s might hit the PD in the 2010s or the 2030s. -- RS
On 7 May 2005, at 1:12, Tom Harris wrote:
Thanks for the concise reply. This means that the1960's text will be OK if hosted in a country with life+70 copyright, such as Australia, since the original author is well dead. Is this correct?
Not necessarily. Some of these jurisdictions have copyrights for previously unpublished works. You will have to find out what the law of the land says to be sure. For instance, Dutch copyright law reserves 25 years for the publisher (see <http://www.tekstadventure.nl/branko/blog/2005/03/unpublished- works> for a small discussion of the law.) IANAL. -- branko collin collin@xs4all.nl
participants (5)
-
Branko Collin -
David Starner -
Jon Niehof -
Robert Shimmin -
Tom Harris