As a result of a copyright complaint, I have removed #30387 from the Project Gutenberg collection: Hand-book for Travellers in Spain and Readers at Home, by Richard Ford 30387 As described below, DP utilized a different print source than the one that was cleared. This is a problem, and should not have been done. The newer print source included an index and new footnotes, which were not omitted (the new intro was). I suspect that the internal page references (which are similar enough to an index to be considered as new authorship) were also from the 1966 edition, and perhaps other small updates. To summarize PG's approach (see www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Sweat_of_the_Brow_Copyright ): - new indexes get a new copyright - new footnotes or inline notes get a new copyright - new intro/endnote/commentary get a new copyright - revised page numbers do not get a new copyright - small spelling changes, or trivial modernization, do not get a new copyright - large-scale modernization (like from middle english to modern) does get a new copyright - translation does get a new copyright - new images get a new copyright In order to place this back in the PG collection, we would need to either (1) start from scratch with the 1845 or 1855 edition, or (2) carefully compare the 1966 to the earlier edition to make sure that all modern materials are removed. To be appropriately duly diligent, a comparison would need to be page by page. I would ask pagination to be changed to reflect that in the 1845/55 edition, not 1966. If (1) or (2) is is forthcoming, we can hold #30387 as "reserved." If not, we will reuse the eBook #. Will Chuck or someone else at DP let me know the plan? Thanks. Greg ----- Forwarded message from Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:02:48 -0800 From: Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> To: Ian Robertson <ianrobertson@wanadoo.fr> Subject: Re: Follow up User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 09:20:18AM +0100, Ian Robertson wrote:
Just a note to remind you that I expect to hear more from you over Ford's Hand-Book early in the New Year, which I trust will be a better one for all concerned.
Sorry for my delay with this, Ian. In fact, I had all the information 2 weeks ago, but neglected to complete my research and send a follow-up before taking a few vacation days. The answer is that you are correct as to the print source used. The proofreading was done against the 1966 SIU Press edition, which you edited. This was obtained via Google Books, I believe. I have copies of the actual scans used by our Distributed Proofreaders (www.pgdp.net), and have confirmed that DP did not include your newly authored introduction from the 1966 edition. However, the index, footnotes, and internal page references (like "see page 1190") were retained. We frequently use later reprints, for practical purposes (like their availability, or quality of the printed book), and have a procedure for this: www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers%27_FAQ#V.19._Are_reprints_or_facsimiles_eligible.3F As you probably already know, new copyrights are granted for new acts of authorship, not reprints: www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Sweat_of_the_Brow_Copyright In examining the eBook at www.gutenberg.org/etext/30387 I see that the index and footnotes from your 1966 edition were used inappropriately. Without comparing to the earlier edition, I cannot tell whether there were internal page references earlier (updating page numbers would not be considered an act of authorship, though identifying internal references would, like an index, typically be thought of as authorship). As a result, it is now clear to me that our item #30387 includes both public domain materials, and your own authored materials from the 1966 edition. As a result of this research, I have now removed our #30387 from the Project Gutenberg collection. We will seek to replace it with a new edition that is wholly derived from the public domain print source. On behalf of Project Gutenberg, I apologize for this oversight. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Greg Newby Dr. Gregory B. Newby Chief Executive and Director Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation http://gutenberg.org A 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization with EIN 64-6221541 gbnewby@pglaf.org ----- End forwarded message -----
Whitewashers: Let's go ahead and reuse #30387, since a replacement is not immediately forthcoming. Thanks ... Greg On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 06:24:50PM -0800, Greg Newby wrote:
As a result of a copyright complaint, I have removed #30387 from the Project Gutenberg collection:
Hand-book for Travellers in Spain and Readers at Home, by Richard Ford 30387
As described below, DP utilized a different print source than the one that was cleared. This is a problem, and should not have been done.
The newer print source included an index and new footnotes, which were not omitted (the new intro was). I suspect that the internal page references (which are similar enough to an index to be considered as new authorship) were also from the 1966 edition, and perhaps other small updates.
To summarize PG's approach (see www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Sweat_of_the_Brow_Copyright ):
- new indexes get a new copyright - new footnotes or inline notes get a new copyright - new intro/endnote/commentary get a new copyright - revised page numbers do not get a new copyright - small spelling changes, or trivial modernization, do not get a new copyright - large-scale modernization (like from middle english to modern) does get a new copyright - translation does get a new copyright - new images get a new copyright
In order to place this back in the PG collection, we would need to either (1) start from scratch with the 1845 or 1855 edition, or (2) carefully compare the 1966 to the earlier edition to make sure that all modern materials are removed. To be appropriately duly diligent, a comparison would need to be page by page. I would ask pagination to be changed to reflect that in the 1845/55 edition, not 1966.
If (1) or (2) is is forthcoming, we can hold #30387 as "reserved." If not, we will reuse the eBook #. Will Chuck or someone else at DP let me know the plan?
Thanks. Greg
----- Forwarded message from Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> -----
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:02:48 -0800 From: Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> To: Ian Robertson <ianrobertson@wanadoo.fr> Subject: Re: Follow up User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 09:20:18AM +0100, Ian Robertson wrote:
Just a note to remind you that I expect to hear more from you over Ford's Hand-Book early in the New Year, which I trust will be a better one for all concerned.
Sorry for my delay with this, Ian. In fact, I had all the information 2 weeks ago, but neglected to complete my research and send a follow-up before taking a few vacation days.
The answer is that you are correct as to the print source used. The proofreading was done against the 1966 SIU Press edition, which you edited. This was obtained via Google Books, I believe.
I have copies of the actual scans used by our Distributed Proofreaders (www.pgdp.net), and have confirmed that DP did not include your newly authored introduction from the 1966 edition. However, the index, footnotes, and internal page references (like "see page 1190") were retained.
We frequently use later reprints, for practical purposes (like their availability, or quality of the printed book), and have a procedure for this:
www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers%27_FAQ#V.19._Are_reprints_or_facsimiles_eligible.3F
As you probably already know, new copyrights are granted for new acts of authorship, not reprints:
www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Sweat_of_the_Brow_Copyright
In examining the eBook at www.gutenberg.org/etext/30387 I see that the index and footnotes from your 1966 edition were used inappropriately. Without comparing to the earlier edition, I cannot tell whether there were internal page references earlier (updating page numbers would not be considered an act of authorship, though identifying internal references would, like an index, typically be thought of as authorship).
As a result, it is now clear to me that our item #30387 includes both public domain materials, and your own authored materials from the 1966 edition.
As a result of this research, I have now removed our #30387 from the Project Gutenberg collection. We will seek to replace it with a new edition that is wholly derived from the public domain print source.
On behalf of Project Gutenberg, I apologize for this oversight. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Greg Newby
Dr. Gregory B. Newby Chief Executive and Director Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation http://gutenberg.org A 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization with EIN 64-6221541 gbnewby@pglaf.org
----- End forwarded message -----
participants (1)
-
Greg Newby