Re: !@!Re: [gutvol-d] Moving and Removing eBooks
"Michael Hart" writes:
As for the recent request to delete Shakespeare #100, I never heard back from my reply, so I never got to the bottom line reasoning behind that request. Perhaps it was only because of copyright, or because it was such an early effort that it needed proofing to bring it up to today's standards.
I sent a message to gutvol-d about it earlier. It's a copyrighted edition of a public domain text, and there's nothing in that file to indicate that the edition was first published in 1931 and isn't just an electronic copy of a public domain edition. And even if it is a 1931 edition, the copyright notices are wrong; electronic editions of texts do not get a new copyright. In many ways, it's the epitome of stuff PG opposes.
There is also great, and worthwhile, concern about the Longfellow translation of Dante. However, it is also an example that should be preserved as an indication of history, even if we recommend the Cary translation or any other as being of better quality.
Who cares about Dante; it's Longfellow. Different translations, even different editions are interesting as long as distinguishing marks are included in the file. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
"D" == D Starner <shalesller@writeme.com> writes:
D> "Michael Hart" writes: >> As for the recent request to delete Shakespeare #100, I never >> heard back from my reply, so I never got to the bottom line >> reasoning behind that request. Perhaps it was only because of >> copyright, or because it was such an early effort that it >> needed proofing to bring it up to today's standards. D> I sent a message to gutvol-d about it earlier. It's a D> copyrighted edition of a public domain text, and there's D> nothing in that file to indicate that the edition was first D> published in 1931 and isn't just an electronic copy of a public D> domain edition. And even if it is a 1931 edition, the copyright D> notices are wrong; electronic editions of texts do not get a D> new copyright. In many ways, it's the epitome of stuff PG D> opposes. Including the original publication date for example would classify this edition as public domain in Italy (where critical editions get 20 years of copyright) and in many other countries. Carlo Traverso
How about removing Mark Twain? ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Starner" <shalesller@writeme.com> To: "Michael S. Hart" <hart@pobox.com>; "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 4:41 PM Subject: Re: !@!Re: [gutvol-d] Moving and Removing eBooks
"Michael Hart" writes:
As for the recent request to delete Shakespeare #100, I never heard back from my reply, so I never got to the bottom line reasoning behind that request. Perhaps it was only because of copyright, or because it was such an early effort that it needed proofing to bring it up to today's standards.
I sent a message to gutvol-d about it earlier. It's a copyrighted edition of a public domain text, and there's nothing in that file to indicate that the edition was first published in 1931 and isn't just an electronic copy of a public domain edition. And even if it is a 1931 edition, the copyright notices are wrong; electronic editions of texts do not get a new copyright. In many ways, it's the epitome of stuff PG opposes.
There is also great, and worthwhile, concern about the Longfellow translation of Dante. However, it is also an example that should be preserved as an indication of history, even if we recommend the Cary translation or any other as being of better quality.
Who cares about Dante; it's Longfellow. Different translations, even different editions are interesting as long as distinguishing marks are included in the file. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, N Wolcott wrote:
How about removing Mark Twain?
Actually, Mark Twain is possibly the most removed author in America. mh
----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Starner" <shalesller@writeme.com> To: "Michael S. Hart" <hart@pobox.com>; "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 4:41 PM Subject: Re: !@!Re: [gutvol-d] Moving and Removing eBooks
"Michael Hart" writes:
As for the recent request to delete Shakespeare #100, I never heard back from my reply, so I never got to the bottom line reasoning behind that request. Perhaps it was only because of copyright, or because it was such an early effort that it needed proofing to bring it up to today's standards.
I sent a message to gutvol-d about it earlier. It's a copyrighted edition of a public domain text, and there's nothing in that file to indicate that the edition was first published in 1931 and isn't just an electronic copy of a public domain edition. And even if it is a 1931 edition, the copyright notices are wrong; electronic editions of texts do not get a new copyright. In many ways, it's the epitome of stuff PG opposes.
There is also great, and worthwhile, concern about the Longfellow translation of Dante. However, it is also an example that should be preserved as an indication of history, even if we recommend the Cary translation or any other as being of better quality.
Who cares about Dante; it's Longfellow. Different translations, even different editions are interesting as long as distinguishing marks are included in the file. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
participants (4)
-
Carlo Traverso -
D. Starner -
Michael Hart -
N Wolcott