From tb at baechler.net Fri Sep 1 01:08:07 2006 From: tb at baechler.net (Tony Baechler) Date: Fri Sep 1 01:08:12 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Google: Download the classics Message-ID: <20060901080807.GA20934@investigative.net> Hello all. Sorry if this is old news. Considering the recent discussions on the list about Google, I thought you might find this interesting. From what I can tell by the urls, they are using the LCCN for at least some titles. I also couldn't help but notice that PG already has some of these if not all. The following is from the official Google blog: Posted by Adam Mathes, Associate Product Manager, Google Book Search Starting today, you can go to [Google Book Search][1] and download full copies of out-of-copyright books to read at your own pace. You're free to choose from a diverse collection of public domain titles -- from well-known classics to obscure gems. Before the rise of the public library -??? a story chronicled in this 1897 edition of [The Free Library][2] ??? access to large collections of books was the privilege of a wealthy minority. Now, with the help of our wonderful [library partners][3], we're able to offer you the ability to download and read PDF versions of out-of-copyright books from some of the world???s greatest collections. Using Google Book Search, you can find The Free Library and many other extraordinary old books, such as: * Ferriar's [The Bibliomania][4] * A futurist from 1881's [1931: A Glance at the Twentieth Century][5] * Aesop's [Fables][6][][7] * Shakespeare's [Hamlet][8] * Abbott's [Flatland][9] * Hugo's [Marion De Lorme][10] * Dunant's [Eine Erinnerung an Solferino][11] * Bol??var's [Proclamas][12] * Dante's [Inferno][13] To find out-of-copyright books that you can download, simply select the "Full view" radio button when you search on books.google.com. (Please note that we do not enable downloading of any book currently under copyright. Unless we have the publisher???s permission to show more, we display only small snippets of text ???- at most, two or three sentences surrounding your search term -??? to help you determine if you???ve found what you???re looking for.) Of course, this is just the beginning. As we digitize more of the world's books -- whether rare, common, popular or obscure -- people everywhere will be able to discover them on Google Book Search. [1]: http://books.google.com/ (Google Book Search) [2]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=LCCN02006048&id=AJCpexX5NUMC&pg=PA3 (The Free Library) [3]: http://books.google.com/googlebooks/partners.html (library partners) [4]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=HARVARD32044024329419&pg=PA3 (The Bibliomania) [5]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=UOM39015004715002&pg=PA1 (Glance at the 20th century) [6]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC03465111&printsec=titlepage (Fables) [7]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC05716993&printsec=titlepage (Principia) [8]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC14763089&id=2-iPD1DrwgYC&pg=PA3 (Hamlet) [9]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=0PO8Zb8GuSvhGZx2&id=u8HOxy7lQYUC&printsec=titlepage (Flatland) [10]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC12330174&id=ZEGJW5a0IfoC&pg=PP11 (Marion De Lorme) [11]: http://books.google.com/books?vid=HARVARD32044012475109&printsec=titlepage (Eine Erinnerung an Solferino) [12]: http://books.google.com/books?id=W162EMZdSVwC&vid=HARVARD32044048104251&jtp=1 (Proclamas) [13]: http://books.google.it/books?vid=OCLC13779284&id=iQ5Glx7BGZkC&printsec=titlepage (Inferno) URL: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/download-classics.html ----- End forwarded message ----- From bruce at zuhause.org Fri Sep 1 09:57:44 2006 From: bruce at zuhause.org (Bruce Albrecht) Date: Fri Sep 1 09:57:46 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Google: Download the classics In-Reply-To: <20060901080807.GA20934@investigative.net> References: <20060901080807.GA20934@investigative.net> Message-ID: <17656.26248.170772.778400@celery.zuhause.org> Tony Baechler writes: > Hello all. Sorry if this is old news. Considering the recent > discussions on the list about Google, I thought you might find this > interesting. From what I can tell by the urls, they are using the LCCN > for at least some titles. I also couldn't help but notice that PG > already has some of these if not all. In some cases, Google is recording the LCCN, other cases, the OCLC number, and in other cases some random string that doesn't seem to represent anything at the library. If Google has the OCLC number associated with the work, they provide a link to OpenWorldCat, so you can find it in a local library (at least in the US). BTW, I've found 132,000 full view books at Google, but they're strongly discouraging me from finding more. From sly at victoria.tc.ca Sat Sep 2 01:29:12 2006 From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly) Date: Sat Sep 2 01:29:28 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Project Gutenberg in Georgia Message-ID: It's nice to see mention of Project Gutenberg in this article: http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/local/states/georgia/counties/houston_peach/15409131.htm Andrew From hart at pglaf.org Mon Sep 4 09:03:16 2006 From: hart at pglaf.org (Michael Hart) Date: Mon Sep 4 09:03:17 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] I received this statistic a while back, Message-ID: that only 2 million of 32 million books under copyright are actually in print. Does anyone know the source? Thanks!!! mh From hart at pglaf.org Mon Sep 4 09:18:48 2006 From: hart at pglaf.org (Michael Hart) Date: Mon Sep 4 09:18:49 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] DOWNLOADING STARTS AT GOOGLE BOOK SEARCH Message-ID: Google's controversial Book Search program is set to begin offering downloads of entire out-of-copyright texts. Until now, books in the program were available online only. With the option to download texts, users can now easily search those texts, print copies of them, or keep local copies on their computers to read offline. Books still under copyright protection are not available for download. Instead, small sections of text are online for users to view, unless the copyright owner grants Google permission to show more text. Many publishers and others have objected to Google's model, saying that even scanning copyrighted books and displaying snippets of them violates their copyright. Sidney Verba, director of the Harvard University Library, one of the libraries participating in the program, said that the ability to search texts allows users to "find previously buried information about historical events or people, places of interest, and matters cultural or scientific." Wall Street Journal, 30 August 2006 (sub. req'd) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115694354228349458.html Can anyone get me the whole article? Thanks! michael From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Mon Sep 4 13:31:13 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Mon Sep 4 13:31:17 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] I received this statistic a while back, Message-ID: <227de922b1cc.22b1cc227de9@ncf.ca> Not sure if those numbers are accurate, or even how anyone would have been able to come up with them, but that proportion actually looks high to my eyes. I did an experiment a while back involving books by authors who died in 1950. My sample size wasn't huge, but I did try to (a) include as many non-famous as well as famous authors who died that year, and (b) track down the title of every full-fledged book that they had published, in Canada, the UK, or the US. Then I tracked down every discrete edition I could find, including translations, adaptations, and video adaptations, as well as, in a separate category, "special editions", into which I lumped the PG editions of works that are cropping up in library catalogs, and audio or digital books prepared most likely under exemptions for the blind and visually impaired. In 1950 ? the year in which the authors in question died ? 12% of their collected works were still in "print" (i.e., available in all editions but "special", supra), or would be in print again at some time in the next fifty years. By 2000, the last year these works are in copyright in the life+50 universe, which is, propaganda notwithstand, most of Earth, that figure was 1.2%. After I enlarged my sample, the proportions didn't change that much, so I think the Law of Large Numbers is at work. I haven't yet constructed a model that accounts for works going out of, and then coming back into print; this model assumes that if a work was in print in 1994, it was also in print in every year going back to first publication. Given that there was a HUGE explosion of publishing in the second half of the 20th century, at least in Canada, and I'd be willing to bet in most of the developed world as well, if not the under-developed too, and that few of those works have enjoyed more than one edition, the 1/16 ratio of in-print©righted to all-ever-published©righted, is probably an over-estimate. I'd like to keep doing some research on this front, but I'm not sure I have time. It is, however, something that could probably be done in a distributed fashion. Anyone who's interested, talk to me. ----- Original Message ----- >From Michael Hart Date Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:03:16 -0700 (PDT) To The gutvol-d Mailing List Subject [gutvol-d] I received this statistic a while back, that only 2 million of 32 million books under copyright are actually in print. Does anyone know the source? Thanks!!! From jeroen.mailinglist at bohol.ph Mon Sep 4 13:58:06 2006 From: jeroen.mailinglist at bohol.ph (Jeroen Hellingman (Mailing List Account)) Date: Mon Sep 4 14:18:24 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] DOWNLOADING STARTS AT GOOGLE BOOK SEARCH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44FC935E.1030700@bohol.ph> I've downloaded a bunch of them, and the clearance requests will be coming in soon... But, The quality of the scanning work is often not very good, I've encountered the following already in a small sample of 25 texts - Missing pages - Double scanned pages - Blurred pages - Moving or bend pages - Hands covering parts of the text - Pages where part of the text is cut of. - Non-functional PDF files (all pages white) I would say, more files have missing pages than are complete. Conclusion: Quality control leaves something to be desired. This means, - Carefully check after downloading - Send out requests to volunteers to get missing pages. - Start the long process of turning it into a real ebook. I've downloaded several books that I have on the shelve ready for scanning, and here it saves a lot of work. Furthermore - Many interesting books are still snippets only, even if clearly out of copyright - Many of the oldest books are still without a PDF. Still a great resource, with lots of books I couldn't get even via ILL. Jeroen. Michael Hart wrote: > Google's controversial Book Search program is set to begin offering > downloads of entire out-of-copyright texts. [...] > > michael > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d > From gbnewby at pglaf.org Mon Sep 4 23:33:12 2006 From: gbnewby at pglaf.org (Greg Newby) Date: Mon Sep 4 23:33:15 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? In-Reply-To: <44E27F4E.9010805@aol.com> References: <5c68395c5bfd.5c5bfd5c6839@ncf.ca> <44DF2678.2050504@perathoner.de> <6d99d1fd0608130950n1e44d7cau2c7d4e269f70d55f@mail.gmail.com> <44DFA1EA.1020409@ibiblio.org> <44DFC437.6040204@perathoner.de> <44DFE73D.1060707@ibiblio.org> <44E27F4E.9010805@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060905063312.GC4419@pglaf.org> > > >>http://www.pgdp.net/noncvs/LCCN/map.txt > > > > > > > > > Not bad. I'll crash now but I'll import them tomorrow. > > Marcello, did you get to import these? I checked just a couple, and didn't see LCCNs indicated on catalog pages. Michael: who makes these? We could collect them at upload time to percolate through the posting process quite easily. I would not mind adding them to the standard eBook header, if we have them in time and are reasonably confident of their accuracy. -- Greg On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 07:13:35PM -0700, Jared Buck wrote: > I didn't expect to see this much conversation, but I'm glad to get such > a variety of responses. Of course I would help with cataloging the > books by subject. :) > > Jared > > Michael Dyck wrote on 13/08/2006, 8:00 PM: > > > [off-list] > > > > Marcello Perathoner wrote: > > > Michael Dyck wrote: > > > > > > > > >>It looks like about 1/3 of DP projects have a valid LCCN (that I could > > >>find, anyway). For the 8890 titles that PG has posted from DP, the > > >>fraction is slightly less. Here is the PG# -> LCCN mapping for 2238 of > > >>them: > > >> > > >>http://www.pgdp.net/noncvs/LCCN/map.txt > > > > > > > > > Not bad. I'll crash now but I'll import them tomorrow. > > > > Actually, it turns out there are further archives that I didn't find, so > > I should have an improved version soonish. > > > > -Michael From jmdyck at ibiblio.org Tue Sep 5 01:54:40 2006 From: jmdyck at ibiblio.org (Michael Dyck) Date: Tue Sep 5 01:54:44 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? In-Reply-To: <20060905063312.GC4419@pglaf.org> References: <5c68395c5bfd.5c5bfd5c6839@ncf.ca> <44DF2678.2050504@perathoner.de> <6d99d1fd0608130950n1e44d7cau2c7d4e269f70d55f@mail.gmail.com> <44DFA1EA.1020409@ibiblio.org> <44DFC437.6040204@perathoner.de> <44DFE73D.1060707@ibiblio.org> <44E27F4E.9010805@aol.com> <20060905063312.GC4419@pglaf.org> Message-ID: <44FD3B50.1090906@ibiblio.org> Greg Newby wrote: > > Michael: who makes these? As part of creating a project at DP, you can do an external catalog search, and select one of the results if it appears to match the book in question. We extract some info from the catalog record of the selected result, including the LCCN. -Michael From joshua at hutchinson.net Tue Sep 5 05:27:05 2006 From: joshua at hutchinson.net (Joshua Hutchinson) Date: Tue Sep 5 05:24:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] DOWNLOADING STARTS AT GOOGLE BOOK SEARCH Message-ID: <20060905122705.DE1709EEF9@ws6-2.us4.outblaze.com> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeroen Hellingman (Mailing List Account)" > The quality of the scanning work is often not very good How responsive is Google to reports of missing/obscured pages? For instance, when I've found similar issues at Cornell's digital archives, the most I've received back is a "Thanks for letting us know" and nothing ever got fixed. (And I don't always even get the "thanks" reply) Josh From vze3rknp at verizon.net Tue Sep 5 05:26:25 2006 From: vze3rknp at verizon.net (Juliet Sutherland) Date: Tue Sep 5 05:26:55 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? In-Reply-To: <44FD3B50.1090906@ibiblio.org> References: <5c68395c5bfd.5c5bfd5c6839@ncf.ca> <44DF2678.2050504@perathoner.de> <6d99d1fd0608130950n1e44d7cau2c7d4e269f70d55f@mail.gmail.com> <44DFA1EA.1020409@ibiblio.org> <44DFC437.6040204@perathoner.de> <44DFE73D.1060707@ibiblio.org> <44E27F4E.9010805@aol.com> <20060905063312.GC4419@pglaf.org> <44FD3B50.1090906@ibiblio.org> Message-ID: <44FD6CF1.4090304@verizon.net> It should be noted that the LCCN derived from the external catalog search may or may not be an exact match for the actual edition that is being used. The author and title will be the same, or very close, but the publisher, year, etc may be different. I've also been faced with two seemingly identical editions, that match the one in my hand, but that have different LCCNs. Then it's a coin toss as to which to choose. Also, most of the non-English books, and even many of those in English, don't turn up any kind of match from LoC (the only catalog we currently search). JulietS Michael Dyck wrote: > Greg Newby wrote: > >> >> Michael: who makes these? > > > As part of creating a project at DP, you can do an external catalog > search, and select one of the results if it appears to match the book > in question. We extract some info from the catalog record of the > selected result, including the LCCN. > > -Michael From hart at pglaf.org Mon Sep 4 09:02:07 2006 From: hart at pglaf.org (Michael Hart) Date: Tue Sep 5 08:01:34 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] 32 Million (C) Books/2 Million In Print Message-ID: I received this statistic a while back, that only 2 million of 32 million books under copyright are actually in print. Does anyone know the source? Thanks!!! mh From gbnewby at pglaf.org Tue Sep 5 14:56:40 2006 From: gbnewby at pglaf.org (Greg Newby) Date: Tue Sep 5 14:56:43 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Fwd: [webgroup] Ibiblio server move Message-ID: <20060905215640.GA25022@pglaf.org> I believe the server that hosts gutenberg.org will be included in the planned outage. -- Greg ----- Forwarded message from Ken Chestnutt ----- From: Ken Chestnutt To: webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org Subject: [webgroup] Ibiblio server move Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 15:30:40 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: gbnewby@pglaf.org Delivered-To: webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org Precedence: list Errors-To: webgroup-bounces@lists.ibiblio.org Hi folks, As you may have noticed from previous emails, ibiblio is in the middle of migrating it's servers from one data center to another. This weekend's final piece of the move is the one that impacts the most people. You can take heart in the fact the previous two moves went well with only a few minor inconveniences. To facilitate the move, we will be turning off access to our servers on Friday, September 8, starting at 6:00 pm EDT (2200 GMT). Access will denied until Saturday, September 9 at 6:00 pm (2200 GMT). We do not expect access to be denied for this long but we are giving ourselves a large window in which to clean up any problems that may arise. This means you will not be able to check your email nor modify your website while we are migrating the servers. Your collection will still be available during most of the move, you will simply be unable to modify them. This is to give us the ability to do one final data synchronization from the servers in our old facility to the servers in our new facility. The only downtime you will experience will be the time the database server is actually being moved. Feel free to add a notice to your website warning your users of the possible interruption. You will not have to do anything UNLESS you manage your own DNS record. If you manage your own DNS record, you will need to repoint your IP address from 152.2.210.81 to 152.46.7.81 on Friday evening. If you have any questions or concerns, please drop us an email at help@ibiblio.org. Thanks ken Ken Chestnutt System Administrator ibiblio.org _______________________________________________ webgroup mailing list webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/webgroup ----- End forwarded message ----- From bruce at zuhause.org Tue Sep 5 18:36:02 2006 From: bruce at zuhause.org (Bruce Albrecht) Date: Tue Sep 5 18:36:05 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] DOWNLOADING STARTS AT GOOGLE BOOK SEARCH In-Reply-To: <20060905122705.DE1709EEF9@ws6-2.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20060905122705.DE1709EEF9@ws6-2.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <17662.9730.340719.654136@celery.zuhause.org> Joshua Hutchinson writes: > > > From: "Jeroen Hellingman (Mailing List Account)" > > > The quality of the scanning work is often not very good > > How responsive is Google to reports of missing/obscured pages? For > instance, when I've found similar issues at Cornell's digital > archives, the most I've received back is a "Thanks for letting us > know" and nothing ever got fixed. (And I don't always even get the > "thanks" reply) I know of at least one case where I reported a bad page, and Google rescanned the book. Unfortunately, the rescanned book also had errors, albeit different from the errors in the original scan. I haven't gone back and checked all of the books for which I've reported errors. It took about 2 months for them to rescan the book, if I recall correctly. Not all of the full view books are available as PDF downloads. I'm not sure if the are in the process of producing PDFs for all of the books or if they've just produced them for recent scans. From gbnewby at pglaf.org Wed Sep 6 17:47:42 2006 From: gbnewby at pglaf.org (Greg Newby) Date: Wed Sep 6 17:47:43 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Headline news on gutenberg.org wiki? Message-ID: <20060907004742.GA17146@pglaf.org> Hi, Marcello & other Wiki experts. Is there a reasonable way to put the headline news we used to have on the main page, back? Currently, news appears here: http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:News but no headlines on the main page. I thought it was nice to have them there...just a simple "3 most recent" or "this month's headlines" would be great. Thanks for considering... -- Greg From JBuck814366460 at aol.com Fri Sep 8 22:09:53 2006 From: JBuck814366460 at aol.com (Jared Buck) Date: Fri Sep 8 22:09:24 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] PG site down - when will be back up? Message-ID: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060908/1313b3c2/attachment.html From marcello at perathoner.de Sat Sep 9 07:03:36 2006 From: marcello at perathoner.de (Marcello Perathoner) Date: Sat Sep 9 07:03:41 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] PG site down - when will be back up? In-Reply-To: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> References: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> Message-ID: <4502C9B8.9070508@perathoner.de> Jared Buck wrote: > Hey, i know the PG site as well as ibiblio is down while the sites get moved to > a new server. can anyone tell me when i can expect them to be back up again? They said allow 24 hours for the move ... -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org From marcello at perathoner.de Sat Sep 9 07:58:01 2006 From: marcello at perathoner.de (Marcello Perathoner) Date: Sat Sep 9 07:58:04 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] PG site down - when will be back up? In-Reply-To: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> References: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> Message-ID: <4502D679.9000905@perathoner.de> Jared Buck wrote: > Hey, i know the PG site as well as ibiblio is down while the sites get moved to > a new server. can anyone tell me when i can expect them to be back up again? Site seems to be up again now. Of course we are 24h behind on the nightly updated pages. If you cannot connect its likely that DNS hasn't updated yet. If you are in a great hurry you may enter 152.46.7.81 www.gutenberg.org into your /etc/hosts file or whatever its equivalent is on that other glorified game console OS. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org From JBuck814366460 at aol.com Sat Sep 9 08:03:41 2006 From: JBuck814366460 at aol.com (Jared Buck) Date: Sat Sep 9 08:03:08 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] PG site down - when will be back up? In-Reply-To: <4502D679.9000905@perathoner.de> References: <45024CA1.8050602@aol.com> <4502D679.9000905@perathoner.de> Message-ID: <4502D7CD.5020402@aol.com> Yeah, it's up and seems to be working :) Marcello Perathoner wrote on 09/09/2006, 7:58 AM: > Jared Buck wrote: > > > Hey, i know the PG site as well as ibiblio is down while the sites > get moved to > > a new server. can anyone tell me when i can expect them to be back > up again? > > Site seems to be up again now. Of course we are 24h behind on the > nightly updated pages. If you cannot connect its likely that DNS hasn't > updated yet. > > If you are in a great hurry you may enter > > 152.46.7.81 www.gutenberg.org > > into your /etc/hosts file or whatever its equivalent is on that other > glorified game console OS. > > > -- > Marcello Perathoner > webmaster@gutenberg.org > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d > -- . .:. .:::. .:::::. ***.:::::::.*** *******.:::::::::.******* Dmitri Yalovsky ********.:::::::::::.******** ********.:::::::::::::.******** USS Authority *******.::::::'***`::::.******* ******.::::'*********`::.****** Asst. Chief of Engineering ****.:::'*************`:.**** *.::'*****************`.* .:' *************** . . From Bowerbird at aol.com Sat Sep 9 14:31:07 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Sat Sep 9 14:31:13 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] creative commons success-story Message-ID: this just came across cory doctorow's listserve... any p.g. e-texts that might appeal to navy kids? -bowerbird ------------------------------------------------ Heartwarming Creative Commons success-story Last week, I received the most remarkable letter from Jamie, a U.S. Navy seaman stationed on a ship in the Mediterranean Sea. Because my novels are Creative Commons-licensed, he is able to download them and print them out onboard ship, and pass them around to his comrades. The absence of quality reading material on the ship has turned Creative Commons texts into hot items on the ship: > Just like to thank you, from some undisclosed (for operational > security reasons, doncha know) location in the middle of the > Mediterranean Sea, for keeping my sanity. I'm in the U.S. Navy, and > my ship got surge-deployed without warning a couple weeks ago to > "help" with the situation in Lebanon. On a ship underway, there's > no room to keep books -- unless they're the ancient, creaking John > Grisham paperbacks in the ship's library -- and no time to get some > anyway if you're scrambling around for the couple days of warning > you have trying to get your bills set up to pay themselves and > telling your landlord you're vanishing for an "open-ended" period > of time. So, the ability to download your stuff from craphound.com > has permitted me to feed my addiction to the printed word without > having to have someplace to store the physical artifact of the books. > Of course, I actually printed out "Someone Comes" and "Down and > Out", the two I don't own dead-tree copies of yet, and stuck 'em in > a binder, where they've been passed from person to person in my > department, helping keep the other sci-fi junkies similarly sane. > > [three days later] > > Thought you might like to know that what started as "Jamie feeds > his print addiction" has turned into something else entirely. The > sci-fi addicts rapidly finished off the two novels I'd printed out > and bindered, and I had the binder with me in the engine room, > reading to pass the time, when one of the other guys asked what I > was reading. > > A couple hours later, the only noise in the place was when one of > the half-dozen guys sitting around would look up and ask, "Hey, > who's got page 41 of Down and Out?" It was... well, I'm not sure I > can express how weird it was. These are men who aren't normally > readers, much less consumers of slightly wacky science fiction, and > they're now getting impatient with each other to finish chapters so > they can find out what happens next. > > It's starting to change the very *tone* of where I work on the > ship, six hours on and six hours off: instead of the ever-present > three B's of talk to pass in the time in the plant -- beer, babes, > and bodily functions -- it's discussions of which novel (or short > story, since we've now got printouts of every piece of fiction on > craphound.com stuffed into a file cabinet) we liked best, and why, > and what makes this stuff cool, and where can we get more like it, > and even starting to talk about the copyfight, and why that's > important. > > I spent about two hours last night as I was reading glancing up > every so often, and grinning like an idiot every time 'cause there > were five guys whose talk usually revolves around how drunk they > were this one time head-down in some pretty intense reading. > > Thank you. This is really something else. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060909/b65ed746/attachment.html From Bowerbird at aol.com Mon Sep 11 12:16:45 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Mon Sep 11 12:16:58 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? Message-ID: <503.231b9a80.3237101d@aol.com> so, did anything get done on this matter on this round of the merry-go-round? -bowerbird p.s. nice summary, john... ----------------------------------------------- j.hagerson said: We have the classic PG conundrum: In response to a suggestion to make a change, someone helpfully (sarcasm, people!) indicates the enormity of the task and asks if the person making the suggestion is willing to single-handedly implement it or to raise tens of thousands of dollars to hire one or more professionals to "do it right." Another responds with a willingness to participate in an aspect of the solution, but only after someone else gets the ball rolling. Another person reminds us that Distributed Proofreaders has already collected the data to provide a partial solution; we only need to create a mechanism to bring their data over to the "parent" site. Finally, someone pipes up that some material provided to DP is so rare that the only records of the material even being created are buried with some defrocked monk who drowned off the coast of Antigua under mysterious circumstances. And someone else will contribute yet another dead horse for us to beat. Come on, people. There is no magic wand to provide a complete instant solution to this issue. There is also nothing wrong for multiple partial solutions. If someone is really excited about petunias, let that person create a petunia page. If the LOC has an official subject category for petunias (I don't know, Science - Botany - Perennial Plants - North America - Petunias), then let's link things that way too. We have Distributed Proofreaders. Do we need Distributed Catalogers? I would be willing to read a book and tell you what categories would be significant to me. I am not a professional cataloger, but I have used a library before and I have some concept of a subject index. The original post was along the lines of "it would be nice if we could do this." Yes, lots of things would be nice and not every nice thing deserves to be done. However, if we fancy ourselves as a library, is not a subject index part of the catalog? Let the flames begin. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060911/1f9c2869/attachment.html From schultzk at uni-trier.de Tue Sep 12 01:58:56 2006 From: schultzk at uni-trier.de (Schultz Keith J.) Date: Tue Sep 12 03:05:45 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? In-Reply-To: <503.231b9a80.3237101d@aol.com> References: <503.231b9a80.3237101d@aol.com> Message-ID: <7081180A-3A15-4DBF-9A1A-BA1BEA9AD4E1@uni-trier.de> Hi Everybody, Just my two cents worth. Subject indicies are very ad hoc wether done by a professional or not. Schools and Universities have other needs than the average Joe at the public library. As a acedemic I prefer full text searches to find relavent material. Inorder to find something by subject I have to KNOW the subject catalogues structure to be efficient. regards Keith. Am 11.09.2006 um 21:16 schrieb Bowerbird@aol.com: > so, did anything get done on this matter > on this round of the merry-go-round? > > -bowerbird > > p.s. nice summary, john... > > ----------------------------------------------- > > j.hagerson said: > > We have the classic PG conundrum: > > In response to a suggestion to make a change, someone helpfully > (sarcasm, > people!) indicates the enormity of the task and asks if the person > making > the suggestion is willing to single-handedly implement it or to > raise tens > of thousands of dollars to hire one or more professionals to "do it > right." > Another responds with a willingness to participate in an aspect of the > solution, but only after someone else gets the ball rolling. > Another person > reminds us that Distributed Proofreaders has already collected the > data to > provide a partial solution; we only need to create a mechanism to > bring > their data over to the "parent" site. Finally, someone pipes up > that some > material provided to DP is so rare that the only records of the > material > even being created are buried with some defrocked monk who drowned > off the > coast of Antigua under mysterious circumstances. And someone else will > contribute yet another dead horse for us to beat. > > Come on, people. There is no magic wand to provide a complete instant > solution to this issue. There is also nothing wrong for multiple > partial > solutions. If someone is really excited about petunias, let that > person > create a petunia page. If the LOC has an official subject category for > petunias (I don't know, Science - Botany - Perennial Plants - North > America > - Petunias), then let's link things that way too. > > We have Distributed Proofreaders. Do we need Distributed > Catalogers? I would > be willing to read a book and tell you what categories would be > significant > to me. I am not a professional cataloger, but I have used a library > before > and I have some concept of a subject index. > > The original post was along the lines of "it would be nice if we > could do > this." Yes, lots of things would be nice and not every nice thing > deserves > to be done. However, if we fancy ourselves as a library, is not a > subject > index part of the catalog? > > Let the flames begin. > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060912/194a6ee6/attachment.html From hart at pglaf.org Tue Sep 12 08:50:27 2006 From: hart at pglaf.org (Michael Hart) Date: Tue Sep 12 08:50:28 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Search by subject for ebooks? In-Reply-To: <503.231b9a80.3237101d@aol.com> References: <503.231b9a80.3237101d@aol.com> Message-ID: Of course there is always the "business model" that got Project Gutenberg started in the first place: Just put one example up per day/week/month until you find out if people like it. . . . If they DO like it, they will help with the rest. 86,600,000 Google hits for: "ebook" OR "ebooks" OR "e-books" OR "e-book". and only 75,700,000 for "bomb" OR "bombs". Give the world eBooks in 2006!!! Michael S. Hart Founder Project Gutenberg On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 Bowerbird@aol.com wrote: > so, did anything get done on this matter > on this round of the merry-go-round? > > -bowerbird > > p.s. nice summary, john... > > ----------------------------------------------- > > j.hagerson said: > > We have the classic PG conundrum: > > In response to a suggestion to make a change, someone helpfully (sarcasm, > people!) indicates the enormity of the task and asks if the person making > the suggestion is willing to single-handedly implement it or to raise tens > of thousands of dollars to hire one or more professionals to "do it right." > Another responds with a willingness to participate in an aspect of the > solution, but only after someone else gets the ball rolling. Another person > reminds us that Distributed Proofreaders has already collected the data to > provide a partial solution; we only need to create a mechanism to bring > their data over to the "parent" site. Finally, someone pipes up that some > material provided to DP is so rare that the only records of the material > even being created are buried with some defrocked monk who drowned off the > coast of Antigua under mysterious circumstances. And someone else will > contribute yet another dead horse for us to beat. > > Come on, people. There is no magic wand to provide a complete instant > solution to this issue. There is also nothing wrong for multiple partial > solutions. If someone is really excited about petunias, let that person > create a petunia page. If the LOC has an official subject category for > petunias (I don't know, Science - Botany - Perennial Plants - North America > - Petunias), then let's link things that way too. > > We have Distributed Proofreaders. Do we need Distributed Catalogers? I would > be willing to read a book and tell you what categories would be significant > to me. I am not a professional cataloger, but I have used a library before > and I have some concept of a subject index. > > The original post was along the lines of "it would be nice if we could do > this." Yes, lots of things would be nice and not every nice thing deserves > to be done. However, if we fancy ourselves as a library, is not a subject > index part of the catalog? > > Let the flames begin. > From kouhia at nic.funet.fi Thu Sep 14 03:05:19 2006 From: kouhia at nic.funet.fi (Juhana Sadeharju) Date: Thu Sep 14 03:37:15 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: 32 Million (C) Books/2 Million In Print Message-ID: >From: Michael Hart > >I received this statistic a while back, >that only 2 million of 32 million books >under copyright are actually in print. What is the year distribution of the 30 million books? What their authors think about the situation? Juhana -- http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-graphics-dev for developers of open source graphics software From nwolcott2ster at gmail.com Thu Sep 14 07:40:39 2006 From: nwolcott2ster at gmail.com (Norm Wolcott) Date: Thu Sep 14 07:43:27 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> I believe PG has been clearing books published pre 1923, even if published in London. Now I read about another case saying all books pre 1909 may be free of copyrigiht. I do not know if this will increase or decrease the pool of books. I believe that all books published after 1923 in England are still subject to copyright unless they fall into the 75 year death rule. What is the status of 1909-1923 books? nwolcott2@post.harvard.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060914/af11f051/attachment.html From prosfilaes at gmail.com Thu Sep 14 10:16:06 2006 From: prosfilaes at gmail.com (David Starner) Date: Thu Sep 14 10:16:10 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> References: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: <6d99d1fd0609141016j3120a12cwe7043244ad7ae6f8@mail.gmail.com> On 9/14/06, Norm Wolcott wrote: > > I believe PG has been clearing books published pre 1923, even if published > in London. Now I read about another case saying all books pre 1909 may be > free of copyrigiht. I do not know if this will increase or decrease the pool > of books. I believe that all books published after 1923 in England are still > subject to copyright unless they fall into the 75 year death rule. What is > the status of 1909-1923 books? According to the 9th Circuit Court in California, books printed between 1908 and 1923 outside the US could still be in copyright. According to just about everyone not heavily partaking of one of that state's major crops, everything printed before 1923 worldwide is out of copyright in the US. From sly at victoria.tc.ca Thu Sep 14 12:16:40 2006 From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly) Date: Thu Sep 14 12:16:44 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> References: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: Your question confuses me a bit, as it does not seem to make a distinction between different laws in different countries. For the most part, life+x terms do not come into consideration when looking at pre-1989 works in a US juristiction. So, you question was: "What is the status of 1909-1923 books?" There is no definite, unquestioned answer. However, if you'll allow me, I'll present a generalization, as far as I understand it. And of course, IANAL. In the US, a number of different groups have used the pre-1923 cut-off to determine public domain status for many years now. I believe this is what is used by the PG clearance team, based on legal advice they have received. It's been mentioned on this list that there was some legal descion that suggests that there may be some items in the time span you mention that could still be covered by copyright, but I don't know any more than that. In the UK, I can't pretend to know the laws in much detail. I would say it's pretty certain that 1909-1923 books would fall under a life+x term, although whether it would be life+50 or life+75, I couldn't say. As always, the only way to ascertain the status of a book, for the purposes of adding to PG, is is to submit a PG copyright clearance request. Andrew On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Norm Wolcott wrote: > I believe PG has been clearing books published pre 1923, even if published in London. Now I read about another case saying all books pre 1909 may be free of copyrigiht. I do not know if this will increase or decrease the pool of books. I believe that all books published after 1923 in England are still subject to copyright unless they fall into the 75 year death rule. What is the status of 1909-1923 books? From jon.ingram at gmail.com Thu Sep 14 12:28:07 2006 From: jon.ingram at gmail.com (Jon Ingram) Date: Thu Sep 14 12:29:49 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: References: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: <4baf53720609141228o2546767eu92c77b9364cd45ab@mail.gmail.com> On 9/14/06, Andrew Sly wrote: > In the UK, I can't pretend to know the laws in much detail. > I would say it's pretty certain that 1909-1923 books would > fall under a life+x term, although whether it would be > life+50 or life+75, I couldn't say. The UK law is life+70, for books both before and after 1909. Note though that it's quite possible for a book to be in copyright in one country, and out of copyright in another, so if you're in the US you don't need to worry about this. There are still probably quite a few books written in the 19th century which are still copy-restricted in the UK. -- Jon Ingram From sly at victoria.tc.ca Thu Sep 14 12:39:20 2006 From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly) Date: Thu Sep 14 12:39:24 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <4baf53720609141228o2546767eu92c77b9364cd45ab@mail.gmail.com> References: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> <4baf53720609141228o2546767eu92c77b9364cd45ab@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the correction. That's what I get for typing too fast and not looking things up. I was not sure if life+70 had been made completely retroactive in England, but from what I've just read, it looks as if it has... Andrew On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Jon Ingram wrote: > On 9/14/06, Andrew Sly wrote: > > In the UK, I can't pretend to know the laws in much detail. > > I would say it's pretty certain that 1909-1923 books would > > fall under a life+x term, although whether it would be > > life+50 or life+75, I couldn't say. > > The UK law is life+70, for books both before and after 1909. Note > though that it's quite possible for a book to be in copyright in one > country, and out of copyright in another, so if you're in the US you > don't need to worry about this. There are still probably quite a few > books written in the 19th century which are still copy-restricted in > the UK. > > From phil at thalasson.com Thu Sep 14 17:26:05 2006 From: phil at thalasson.com (Philip Baker) Date: Thu Sep 14 18:23:47 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: In article , Andrew Sly writes >Thanks for the correction. That's what I get for typing >too fast and not looking things up. > >I was not sure if life+70 had been made completely >retroactive in England, but from what I've just read, >it looks as if it has... > Completely retroactive. When the law changed from life+50 to life+70 some authors works (eg Thomas Hardy) went back into copyright. -- Philip Baker From hyphen at hyphenologist.co.uk Fri Sep 15 01:06:33 2006 From: hyphen at hyphenologist.co.uk (Dave Fawthrop) Date: Fri Sep 15 01:07:00 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <6d99d1fd0609141016j3120a12cwe7043244ad7ae6f8@mail.gmail.com> References: <010501c6d80b$cca5dde0$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> <6d99d1fd0609141016j3120a12cwe7043244ad7ae6f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 12:16:06 -0500, "David Starner" wrote: |On 9/14/06, Norm Wolcott wrote: |> |> I believe PG has been clearing books published pre 1923, even if published |> in London. Now I read about another case saying all books pre 1909 may be |> free of copyrigiht. I do not know if this will increase or decrease the pool |> of books. I believe that all books published after 1923 in England are still |> subject to copyright unless they fall into the 75 year death rule. What is |> the status of 1909-1923 books? | |According to the 9th Circuit Court in California, books printed |between 1908 and 1923 outside the US could still be in copyright. |According to just about everyone not heavily partaking of one of that |state's major crops, everything printed before 1923 worldwide is out |of copyright in the US. For the EU the rule is death plus *70* years or in some places death plus *50* years -- Dave Fawthrop From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Fri Sep 15 12:22:57 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Fri Sep 15 12:22:59 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: <38ef073897a7.3897a738ef07@ncf.ca> Jon Ingram writes: > The UK law is life+70, for books both before and after 1909. Is it? The Canadian amendment in the 1920s which moved us from fixed to life+ terms, expressly provided that the life+ term did not serve to revive copyright in works which had already passed from copyright: 11-12 Geo. V., c. 24 41(1) Where any person is immediately before the commencement of this Act entitled to any such right in any work as is specified in the first column of the First Schedule to this Act, or to any interest in such a right, he shall, as from that date, be entitled to the subsituted right set forth in the second column of that Schedule or to the same interset in such a substituted right, and to no other right or interest, and such substitued right shall subsist for the term for which it would have subsisted if this Act had been in force at the date when the work was made... (3) Subject to the provisions of subsection six and seven of section 18 of this Act, copyright shall not subsist in any work made before the commencement of this Act, otherwise than under, and in accordance with, the provisions of this section. 44. No person shall be entitled to copyright... otherwise than under and in accordance with the provisions of this Act... The schedule sets out the old and new definition of "copyright" in works other than musical works. The effect of this transitional provision is that works which were still under copyright ? i.e., in which a person was entitled to a right ? are subject to that right for the new, life+50 Berne term. By necessary implication, those who do NOT have a right as of the commencement of the Act, do not have the benefit of the new term. By a later amendment, the commencement was fixed as January 1, 1924. The pre-Berne copyright term in Canada was the old 28+14 renewable one, with formalities. Thus, any work published in Canada before January 1, 1924 without the appropriate formalities, is public domain in Canada regardless of whether it would be copyrighted under the life+50 rule, if it applied. There is Canadian case law upholding the pre-Berne formalities requirement. Similarly, no work published in Canada before 1883 can possibly be copyright in Canada, as even if the formalities were complied with, and the term was renewed, such a work was public domain ? no one was entitled to a right ? by the time the new Berne term cam in on January 1, 1924. Works published outside Canada are in a murkier area, which I still haven't been able to resolve. I thought the Canadian transition to Berne was modelled to at least some extent on the UK one. It might be worth double-checking the UK statute which adopted the Berne term to see whether, upon a proper construction, and in concert with the stupid, stupid, stupid move to life+70, it would result in a larger public domain than the life+ rule, strictly applied, would give. From jon.ingram at gmail.com Fri Sep 15 15:02:07 2006 From: jon.ingram at gmail.com (Jon Ingram) Date: Fri Sep 15 15:02:11 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <38ef073897a7.3897a738ef07@ncf.ca> References: <38ef073897a7.3897a738ef07@ncf.ca> Message-ID: <4baf53720609151502q3ca9f90fy55e5746410e49132@mail.gmail.com> On 9/15/06, Wallace J.McLean wrote: > > Jon Ingram writes: > > > The UK law is life+70, for books both before and after 1909. > > > Is it? Yes. The move from life+50 to life+70 in the UK was retroactive, and brought 20 years worth of material back into the copy-restricted realm from the public domain. Note, however, that if a non-UK work becomes public domain in its country of origin, then UK law states that it is also public domain in the UK... a common provision in copyright law in many countries, although not I believe in the USA. I believe this would cover most US-authored works published before 1923. -- Jon Ingram From Bowerbird at aol.com Fri Sep 15 16:27:21 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 15 16:27:33 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] have a nice weekend Message-ID: oh, this is rich. > http://www.pgdp.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22216&start=0 it's a discussion over at distributed proofreaders about repurposing digitizations found elsewhere on the web into the d.p. workflow, jumpstarting the proofing process with a text that has already received a good amount of proofing. the catch? the other digitizations have linebreaks removed, making proofing more difficult for d.p. people... kind of ironic, isn't it? anyway, have a nice weekend! :+) -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060915/8d3e7d74/attachment.html From traverso at dm.unipi.it Fri Sep 15 22:31:32 2006 From: traverso at dm.unipi.it (Carlo Traverso) Date: Fri Sep 15 22:31:52 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] have a nice weekend In-Reply-To: (Bowerbird@aol.com) References: Message-ID: <200609160531.k8G5VWJ11306@pico.dm.unipi.it> >>>>> "Bowerbird" == Bowerbird writes: Bowerbird> it's a discussion over at distributed proofreaders Bowerbird> about repurposing digitizations found elsewhere on the Bowerbird> web into the d.p. workflow, jumpstarting the proofing Bowerbird> process with a text that has already received a good Bowerbird> amount of proofing. the catch? the other Bowerbird> digitizations have linebreaks removed, making proofing Bowerbird> more difficult for d.p. people... Too easy to solve: OCR the images, preserving line breaks, add to every end-of-line a character not otherwise appearing much, e.g. @, run wdiff between the two versions, replace [-@-] with a linebreak, remove the other differences with a regexp. You might miss some linebreaks, if the OCR is very bad. But a better regexp might help in this case. Carlo From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 16 15:11:07 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Sat Sep 16 15:11:08 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> >From the UK Act: Duration of copyright Section 12: Duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works 12.-(1) The following provisions have effect with respect to the duration of copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work. (2) Copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies, subject as follows. SCHEDULE 1 Copyright: transitional provisions and savings 3. The new copyright provisions apply in relation to things existing at commencement as they apply in relation to things coming into existence after commencement, subject to any express provision to the contrary. 5.-(1) Copyright subsists in an existing work after commencement only if copyright subsisted in it immediately before commencement. Duration of copyright in existing works 12.-(1) The following provisions have effect with respect to the duration of copyright in existing works. The question which provision applies to a work shall be determined by reference to the facts immediately before commencement; and expressions used in this paragraph which were defined for the purposes of the 1956 Act have the same meaning as in that Act. (2) Copyright in the following descriptions of work continues to subsist until the date on which it would have expired under the 1956 Act- (a) literary, dramatic or musical works in relation to which the period of 50 years mentioned in the proviso to section 2(3) of the 1956 Act (duration of copyright in works made available to the public after the death of the author) has begun to run; Unless I'm missing something, reading all these sections together, esp. s. 5(1) of the Schedule, spell non-retroactivity of the stupid, stupid, stupid 20-year extension to life+70. If the life+50 term had already run out, the life+70 term does NOT apply. From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 16 15:12:03 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Sat Sep 16 15:12:04 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: <3a112c3a5f2e.3a5f2e3a112c@ncf.ca> Jon Ingram writes: > Yes. The move from life+50 to life+70 in the UK was retroactive, and > brought 20 years worth of material back into the copy-restricted realm > from the public domain. Which provisions of the UK Act operate to make the term retroactive? By my reading of the provisions of the Act which I have cited, it expressly does NOT make it retroactive. > Note, however, that if a non-UK work becomes public domain in its > country of origin, then UK law states that it is also public domain in > the UK... a common provision in copyright law in many countries, In the EU, yes. "The rule of the lesser term." It's mandated by the EU's garbage copyright directive, as a pressure tactic to try and get the rest of the world to "harmonize". It's not all that common in the non-EU countries I've looked at, though. From jon.ingram at gmail.com Sat Sep 16 16:33:00 2006 From: jon.ingram at gmail.com (Jon Ingram) Date: Sat Sep 16 16:33:03 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <3a112c3a5f2e.3a5f2e3a112c@ncf.ca> References: <3a112c3a5f2e.3a5f2e3a112c@ncf.ca> Message-ID: <4baf53720609161633n38b6b998o2e44dbabbbb96382@mail.gmail.com> On 9/16/06, Wallace J.McLean wrote: > > > Jon Ingram writes: > > > Yes. The move from life+50 to life+70 in the UK was retroactive, and > > brought 20 years worth of material back into the copy-restricted realm > > from the public domain. > > Which provisions of the UK Act operate to make the term retroactive? By > my reading of the provisions of the Act which I have cited, it > expressly does NOT make it retroactive. I don't claim to be a lawyer (in fact I am very happy that I'm not one!), but I believe the general principle is that the EU copyright directive has primacy over the laws in individual countries, and this basically revived copyright in all EU countries if the work was currently in copyright in *any* EU country at the time of the directive -- this means Germany's life+70 infected the rest of us. Similarly, the UK's 50-year term of protection for sound recordings retroactively infected the rest of the EU, most of which previously had much shorter terms. Of course, being law, and law involving different countries, it's never simple enough to be able to summarise in a couple of sentences. I've been hunting for some more detailed articles on the consequences of the EU copyright harmonization, and have found the following quite useful: Zombie and Once-Dead Works: Copyright Retroactivity After the E.C. Term Directive (2000) by Paul Edward Geller http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~pgeller/ecterm.htm "In the fall of 1993, the E.C. adopted the Term Directive. Against the deadline of mid-1995, E.C. countries enacted legislation to implement the Term Directive. Article 1 of this Term Directive required E.C. countries to extend the normal copyright term of life plus 50 years to life plus 70 years; article 3 also required that related or neighboring rights normally last 50 years... As of the deadline of mid-1995, article 10 of the Term Directive was retroactively to bring protection to many works and media productions that either apparently or effectively had fallen into the public domain." > In the EU, yes. "The rule of the lesser term." It's mandated by the > EU's garbage copyright directive, as a pressure tactic to try and get > the rest of the world to "harmonize". The rule of the lesser or shorter term is from the Berne Convension, not from the EU harmonization directive, and I would therefore expect it to be followed by most countries in the world. Another quote from the article I refer to above: "However, under the Berne Convention, the Berne rule of the shorter term may apply to works of foreign origin. This rule allows a Berne country to cut off protection of a foreign Berne work at the end of the shorter of two so-called measuring terms: either that applicable in the country where protection is claimed ... or that applicable in the country of origin." -- Jon Ingram From brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk Sat Sep 16 17:27:14 2006 From: brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk (Brett Paul Dunbar) Date: Sat Sep 16 17:28:39 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> References: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> Message-ID: <9gn4qiRiZJDFFwC2@dimetrodon.demon.co.uk> Wallace J.McLean writes > > > > >>From the UK Act: The relevant legislation, which you are quoting, IS NOT an Act (primary legislation) it is a Statutory Instrument (SI) (secondary legislation) specifically it is: Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 3297 The Duration of Copyright and Rights in Performances Regulations 1995 > >Unless I'm missing something, reading all these sections together, >esp. s. 5(1) of the Schedule, spell non-retroactivity of the stupid, >stupid, stupid 20-year extension to life+70. If the life+50 term had >already run out, the life+70 term does NOT apply. How when reading the SI did you miss this? Extended and revived copyright 17. In the following provisions of this Part? "extended copyright" means any copyright which subsists by virtue of the new provisions after the date on which it would have expired under the 1988 provisions; and "revived copyright" means any copyright which subsists by virtue of the new provisions after having expired under the 1988 provisions or any earlier enactment relating to copyright. Which rather clearly demonstrates that revived copyright exists. The term is also used in several other parts of the SI, for example dealing with the ownership of revived copyright. -- Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/ Brett Paul Dunbar To email me, use reply-to address From nwolcott2ster at gmail.com Sat Sep 16 21:18:00 2006 From: nwolcott2ster at gmail.com (Norm Wolcott) Date: Sat Sep 16 21:25:39 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 References: <38ef073897a7.3897a738ef07@ncf.ca> <4baf53720609151502q3ca9f90fy55e5746410e49132@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005301c6da10$4ba9f800$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> And a recent post in BookPeople says: I looked at the 1909 Copyright Act, Sections 22 and 23, where it basically says that works in the English language published in a foreign country can get 5 years of interim copyright protection, in which time the copyright can create an authorized edition in the US and get a US copyright. IANAL, but this suggests to me that English language publications published abroad prior to 1918 are all in the public domain in the US because the interim copyright expired no later than 1922, and any copyrights from an authorized US edition obtained in 1917-1922 have lapsed. Is this 5 year provision still in force? To me this would seem to imply that English language books published abroad that have not been published in the US within 5 years would have no US copyright. In particular english language books never published in the US would have no copyright. Am I obviously missing something? Obviously the US Code not the copyright Act is probably the controlling factor. The clause may have been revoked. nwolcott2@post.harvard.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Ingram" To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 6:02 PM Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 > On 9/15/06, Wallace J.McLean wrote: > > > > Jon Ingram writes: > > > > > The UK law is life+70, for books both before and after 1909. > > > > > > Is it? > > Yes. The move from life+50 to life+70 in the UK was retroactive, and > brought 20 years worth of material back into the copy-restricted realm > from the public domain. > > Note, however, that if a non-UK work becomes public domain in its > country of origin, then UK law states that it is also public domain in > the UK... a common provision in copyright law in many countries, > although not I believe in the USA. I believe this would cover most > US-authored works published before 1923. > > -- > Jon Ingram > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d From hyphen at hyphenologist.co.uk Sun Sep 17 00:16:37 2006 From: hyphen at hyphenologist.co.uk (Dave Fawthrop) Date: Sun Sep 17 00:16:50 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> References: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 18:11:07 -0400, "Wallace J.McLean" wrote: | | | | |>From the UK Act: | | |Duration of copyright | |Section 12: Duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or |artistic works | |12.-(1) The following provisions have effect with respect to the |duration of copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic |work. | |(2) Copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the |end of the calendar year in which the author dies, subject as follows. | | | |SCHEDULE 1 | |Copyright: transitional provisions and savings | | |3. The new copyright provisions apply in relation to things existing |at commencement as they apply in relation to things coming into |existence after commencement, subject to any express provision to the |contrary. | |5.-(1) Copyright subsists in an existing work after commencement only |if copyright subsisted in it immediately before commencement. | | |Duration of copyright in existing works | |12.-(1) The following provisions have effect with respect to the |duration of copyright in existing works. | |The question which provision applies to a work shall be determined by |reference to the facts immediately before commencement; and |expressions used in this paragraph which were defined for the purposes |of the 1956 Act have the same meaning as in that Act. | |(2) Copyright in the following descriptions of work continues to |subsist until the date on which it would have expired under the 1956 |Act- | |(a) literary, dramatic or musical works in relation to which the |period of 50 years mentioned in the proviso to section 2(3) of the |1956 Act (duration of copyright in works made available to the public |after the death of the author) has begun to run; | | | |Unless I'm missing something, reading all these sections together, |esp. s. 5(1) of the Schedule, spell non-retroactivity of the stupid, |stupid, stupid 20-year extension to life+70. If the life+50 term had |already run out, the life+70 term does NOT apply. The UK parliament absolutely *hates* retrospective laws, and almost never passes them, so this is what I would expect. -- Dave Fawthrop "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain From jeroen.mailinglist at bohol.ph Sun Sep 17 03:49:23 2006 From: jeroen.mailinglist at bohol.ph (Jeroen Hellingman (Mailing List Account)) Date: Sun Sep 17 03:43:28 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: References: <3a06a13a11da.3a11da3a06a1@ncf.ca> Message-ID: <450D2833.5090509@bohol.ph> Dave Fawthrop wrote: > | > |Unless I'm missing something, reading all these sections together, > |esp. s. 5(1) of the Schedule, spell non-retroactivity of the stupid, > |stupid, stupid 20-year extension to life+70. If the life+50 term had > |already run out, the life+70 term does NOT apply. > > The UK parliament absolutely *hates* retrospective laws, and almost never > passes them, so this is what I would expect. > The retroactivity stems from EU treaties, and was never made explicit in the law. Since parliament considered the issue non-controversial, it just passed the law without much discussion. The law is not retroactive in the sense that it criminalizes past behaviour, even though it stole works from the public domain. Same happened in Holland. Shame, shame, shame, and lets lobby to reverse this law. If only enough EU lawmakers realize how bad this is, it could be reversed. Jeroen. From greg at durendal.org Sun Sep 17 06:56:20 2006 From: greg at durendal.org (Greg Weeks) Date: Sun Sep 17 07:30:05 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 In-Reply-To: <005301c6da10$4ba9f800$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> References: <38ef073897a7.3897a738ef07@ncf.ca> <4baf53720609151502q3ca9f90fy55e5746410e49132@mail.gmail.com> <005301c6da10$4ba9f800$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 17 Sep 2006, Norm Wolcott wrote: > Is this 5 year provision still in force? To me this would seem to imply that > English language books published abroad that have not been published in the > US within 5 years would have no US copyright. In particular english language > books never published in the US would have no copyright. Am I obviously > missing something? Obviously the US Code not the copyright Act is probably > the controlling factor. The clause may have been revoked. No, the interim provision is not in force any more. The current law for new copyrights does not require a US registration to recognize foreign copyrights. The US is a Berne signatory now and wasn't during the life of the 1909 law. It did work that way, where if you didn't file within 5 years in the US you got no protection. That changed sometime in the 70's and the 1996 Uragray round made it retroactive. Lots of things came back under copyright in the US in 1996. That's why rule 6 only applies for US authors and for books first published in the US. It gets really hairy if both of those aren't true. IANAL and this isn't advise, but I've been beating my head against it for over a year now, and that's my understanding. If anyone has a better understanding pipe up. -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ From Bowerbird at aol.com Sun Sep 17 08:29:59 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Sun Sep 17 08:30:08 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: <4ff.5f6098c.323ec3f7@aol.com> y.a.n.a.l. (you are not a lawyer.) -bowerbird p.s. ...even if you _might_ look good in one of those powdered white wigs... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060917/793f6b5d/attachment-0001.html From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Sun Sep 17 12:59:05 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Sun Sep 17 12:59:11 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: Jon Ingram writeth: > The rule of the lesser or shorter term is from the Berne Convension, > not from the EU harmonization directive, and I would therefore expect > it to be followed by most countries in the world. Another quote from > the article I refer to above: > "However, under the Berne Convention, the Berne rule of the shorter > term may apply to works of foreign origin. This rule allows a Berne > country to cut off protection of a foreign Berne work at the end of > the shorter of two so-called measuring terms: either that applicable > in the country where protection is claimed ... or that applicable in > the country of origin." The Berne "rule of the lesser term" was permissive, not mandatory. The EU "rule of the lesser term" is mandatory. And it seems that the UK enacted it in a separate statute in 1995, rather than doing the sensible thing and amending and consolidating the Copyright Act itself. Grrr.. From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca Sun Sep 17 13:06:03 2006 From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean) Date: Sun Sep 17 13:06:05 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Copyright to 1909 Message-ID: Brett Paul Dunbar writeth: > How when reading the SI did you miss this? > 17. In the following provisions of this Part? "extended copyright" means any copyright which subsists by virtue of the new provisions after the date on which it would have expired under the 1988 provisions; and "revived copyright" means any copyright which subsists by virtue of the new provisions after having expired under the 1988 provisions or any earlier enactment relating to copyright. What I was quoting was Sched I. to the 1988 Act: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_22.htm The 1995 (curse you EU!) reg is a separate piece of legislation, and is not the one I quoted from. From hart at pglaf.org Mon Sep 18 09:49:45 2006 From: hart at pglaf.org (Michael Hart) Date: Mon Sep 18 09:49:46 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: 32 Million (C) Books/2 Million In Print In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think this was under US copyright, so that would be after 1923, perhaps with some exceptions, and previously discussed. What millions of authors think? Hard to tell. On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Juhana Sadeharju wrote: >> From: Michael Hart >> >> I received this statistic a while back, >> that only 2 million of 32 million books >> under copyright are actually in print. > > What is the year distribution of the 30 million books? > What their authors think about the situation? > > Juhana > -- > http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-graphics-dev > for developers of open source graphics software > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d > From gbnewby at pglaf.org Wed Sep 20 23:32:23 2006 From: gbnewby at pglaf.org (Greg Newby) Date: Wed Sep 20 23:32:25 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Fwd: [webgroup] ibiblio.org server migration Message-ID: <20060921063223.GA26403@pglaf.org> FYI....please report any continuing anomalies to webmaster@gutenberg.org with cc to me. -- Greg ----- Forwarded message from Ken Chestnutt ----- From: Ken Chestnutt To: webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org Cc: ibiblio-announce@ibiblio.org Subject: [webgroup] ibiblio.org server migration Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:07:17 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: gbnewby@pglaf.org Delivered-To: webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org Precedence: list Errors-To: webgroup-bounces@lists.ibiblio.org Hi Folks, By now I'm sure you are aware that ibiblio.org has migrated to a new set of servers in a new facility. Some of you are painfully aware of the migration and for that we are sorry. We needed to move to the new facility due to the rising cost of bandwidth among other reasons, and we needed to move to the new servers because the old servers were exactly that, old. Additionally, we moved to the most recent stable build of Red Hat Linux, which will enable us to run more of our standard services *out of the box*. This will allow us to administer our server farm more efficiently. In the past, most of our applications were hand-built which can make maintenance unwieldly. We have already seen payoff in the fact that the web pages load faster, we have more free disk space, and the servers themselves are not as taxed. As of today, Wednesday morning, we think we have fixed most of the major issues surrounding our collections. We believe we have resolved the issue regarding HTTP authentication. Some of our sites are still seeing issues with database connectivity, and we are still working on that. To ensure that no issue has dropped through the cracks, please test your collection to make sure it's working the way it should. If it is not working correctly, and it was working correctly before the move, please send email to help@ibiblio.org with the subject line SERVER MIGRATION. Then, of course, please describe the problem you are having with any helpful, pertinent information you can include. Thank you for your patience during this migration! ken Ken Chestnutt System Administrator ibiblio.org _______________________________________________ webgroup mailing list webgroup@lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/webgroup ----- End forwarded message ----- From Bowerbird at aol.com Thu Sep 21 10:14:41 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Thu Sep 21 10:14:52 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Fwd: [webgroup] ibiblio.org server migration Message-ID: <4c5.5afbc280.32442281@aol.com> ibiblio said: > We needed to move to the new facility due to > the rising cost of bandwidth among other reasons it's probably good for us to know that ibiblio does indeed care about the cost of bandwidth, at some level and in a kind of fashion anyway... i think many of us assumed that's a blank check. it's always appropriate to be sufficiently grateful when someone extends to you a continuous gift. -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060921/3d8701fb/attachment.html From sly at victoria.tc.ca Fri Sep 22 14:54:58 2006 From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly) Date: Fri Sep 22 14:55:01 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts Message-ID: I've tried creating a list of examples of some of the ways that PG texts have been used (other than simply being read). If you are interested, take a look at: http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Reusing_Project_Gutenberg_texts More examples and more ideas would be welcome. Let me know what you have run across, and add to the list if you feel like it... Andrew From greg at durendal.org Fri Sep 22 15:37:25 2006 From: greg at durendal.org (Greg Weeks) Date: Fri Sep 22 16:00:07 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Andrew Sly wrote: > > I've tried creating a list of examples of some of the ways > that PG texts have been used (other than simply being read). > > If you are interested, take a look at: > http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Reusing_Project_Gutenberg_texts > > More examples and more ideas would be welcome. > Let me know what you have run across, and add > to the list if you feel like it... An amazon.com link for "Murder in the gunroom" also. I did the lulu copy, so I don't think it really counts, but two other publishers have picked it up also. http://www.amazon.com/Murder-Gunroom-H-Beam-Piper/dp/1598189298/ref=ed_oe_p/104-8387194-9920755?ie=UTF8 I think little fuzzy has been picked up by three different publishers and at least one plans a mass market paperback rather than trade. The text for these comes from the PG edition. -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ From greg at durendal.org Fri Sep 22 15:37:25 2006 From: greg at durendal.org (Greg Weeks) Date: Fri Sep 22 16:00:08 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Andrew Sly wrote: > > I've tried creating a list of examples of some of the ways > that PG texts have been used (other than simply being read). > > If you are interested, take a look at: > http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Reusing_Project_Gutenberg_texts > > More examples and more ideas would be welcome. > Let me know what you have run across, and add > to the list if you feel like it... An amazon.com link for "Murder in the gunroom" also. I did the lulu copy, so I don't think it really counts, but two other publishers have picked it up also. http://www.amazon.com/Murder-Gunroom-H-Beam-Piper/dp/1598189298/ref=ed_oe_p/104-8387194-9920755?ie=UTF8 I think little fuzzy has been picked up by three different publishers and at least one plans a mass market paperback rather than trade. The text for these comes from the PG edition. -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ From cannona at fireantproductions.com Fri Sep 22 16:19:12 2006 From: cannona at fireantproductions.com (Aaron Cannon) Date: Fri Sep 22 16:46:00 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts References: Message-ID: <000901c6de9d$9d5c9540$0300a8c0@blackbox> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Let us not forget that snippets of Gutenberg texts are often found in spam. Sincerely Aaron Cannon - -- Skype: cannona MSN/Windows Messenger: cannona@hotmail.com (don't send email to the hotmail address.) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Weeks" To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" Cc: Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 5:37 PM Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Andrew Sly wrote: > >> >> I've tried creating a list of examples of some of the ways >> that PG texts have been used (other than simply being read). >> >> If you are interested, take a look at: >> http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Reusing_Project_Gutenberg_texts >> >> More examples and more ideas would be welcome. >> Let me know what you have run across, and add >> to the list if you feel like it... > > An amazon.com link for "Murder in the gunroom" also. I did the lulu copy, > so I don't think it really counts, but two other publishers have picked it > up also. > > http://www.amazon.com/Murder-Gunroom-H-Beam-Piper/dp/1598189298/ref=ed_oe_p/104-8387194-9920755?ie=UTF8 > > I think little fuzzy has been picked up by three different publishers and > at least one plans a mass market paperback rather than trade. The text for > these comes from the PG edition. > > -- > Greg Weeks > http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.959 Comment: Key available from all major key servers. iD8DBQFFFG+cI7J99hVZuJcRAl3+AJ94gJG4dhZmu8SD1+au5dSctpgzbQCgzD2b 8Do2gtQX4ZgwWbbJDROnkYs= =wpWG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ke at gnu.franken.de Sat Sep 23 01:15:44 2006 From: ke at gnu.franken.de (Karl Eichwalder) Date: Sat Sep 23 02:10:55 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: [PG-EU] INTERNET FOUNDER SAYS eBOOKS NEXT BIG THING In-Reply-To: (Michael Hart's message of "Wed, 20 Sep 2006 06:10:28 -0700 (PDT)") References: Message-ID: Michael Hart writes: > Vint Cerf, known as the creator of the Internet said, [...] > The result is that Project Gutenberg and its fellow supporters > of The World eBook Fair have added more books for The Second > World eBook Fair in the just about two months since the first of > the World eBook Fairs than Google has been able to add in the > just about two years since it announced The Google Print Library > in the Fall of 2004. Do you believe your own or his statements? With every new day I find new books in PDF format with Google Book Search, books not available somewhere else. > The Second World eBook Fair will open October 1, 2006, > in honor of World Book Fair Month at > > http://worldebookfair.com How is this site meant to work? I do not find a single book there. I directs me a searchportal with "sponsored links" and "top sites". If I search for, say, "Goethe", no single Goethe item seems to be available. > 100,000+ Free eBooks Available from Project Gutenberg Approx. 20,000 books are available from PG, that's very good--it will take several years until we can offer 100,000 books. -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C From dixonm at pobox.com Sat Sep 23 13:41:10 2006 From: dixonm at pobox.com (Meredith Dixon) Date: Sat Sep 23 13:47:33 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45159BE6.9080300@pobox.com> Andrew Sly wrote: > I've tried creating a list of examples of some of the ways > that PG texts have been used (other than simply being read). > > If you are interested, take a look at: > http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Reusing_Project_Gutenberg_texts > > More examples and more ideas would be welcome. > Let me know what you have run across, and add > to the list if you feel like it... I'd like to add that the Vergil Group on LatinStudy (latinstudy@nxport.com) has been doing a collaborative translation of Vergil's Aeneid, using PG's text, since 1999. But I'm not sure where on the Wiki to put that. It may belong on your page, but if it does it would need a fifth category. (I considered adding it under "reformatted e-books", since we do reformat the text before we start translating, but it didn't seem to fit with the other entries there.) It's really more like the example given in the documentation of someone's using PG books to teach English in Africa, but the docs weren't clear on where that should go, either. -- Meredith Dixon Check out *Raven Days* For victims and survivors of bullying at school. And for those who want to help. From sly at victoria.tc.ca Sat Sep 23 14:21:12 2006 From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly) Date: Sat Sep 23 14:21:17 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts In-Reply-To: <45159BE6.9080300@pobox.com> References: <45159BE6.9080300@pobox.com> Message-ID: Thanks for mentioning this. To start with, the page I mentioned is very much a work in progress. The headings in it are not fixed. I've added another heading, and included a LatinStudy item. Thank you for mentioning Project Gutenberg on the page http://www.ravendays.org/latin/lists/vergil.html However, I would request that you not use the old URL http://promo.net/pg/ which leads you to a very outdated site. For your purposes, it might be best to link directly to: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/227 Also, I'm not clear on your objective here. Are you presenting this merely as a translating exercise, or are you intending to have a full translation worth preserving when you are done? Andrew On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Meredith Dixon wrote: > > I'd like to add that the Vergil Group on LatinStudy (latinstudy@nxport.com) > has been doing a collaborative translation > of Vergil's Aeneid, using PG's text, since 1999. But I'm not sure where on > the Wiki to put that. It may belong on > your page, but if it does it would need a fifth category. (I considered > adding it under "reformatted e-books", since > we do reformat the text before we start translating, but it didn't seem to fit > with the other entries there.) It's really > more like the example given in the documentation of someone's using PG books > to teach English in Africa, but the > docs weren't clear on where that should go, either. > > > > From bruce at zuhause.org Sat Sep 23 16:12:37 2006 From: bruce at zuhause.org (Bruce Albrecht) Date: Sat Sep 23 16:12:40 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: [PG-EU] INTERNET FOUNDER SAYS eBOOKS NEXT BIG THING In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17685.48997.937813.779984@celery.zuhause.org> Karl Eichwalder writes: > Michael Hart writes: > > > Vint Cerf, known as the creator of the Internet said, > [...] > > The result is that Project Gutenberg and its fellow supporters > > of The World eBook Fair have added more books for The Second > > World eBook Fair in the just about two months since the first of > > the World eBook Fairs than Google has been able to add in the > > just about two years since it announced The Google Print Library > > in the Fall of 2004. > > Do you believe your own or his statements? With every new day I find > new books in PDF format with Google Book Search, books not available > somewhere else. I personally find Michael Hart's counts of his World eBook Fair to be quite inflated, counting many Project Gutenberg books two or three times. I have personally located over 110,000 full view books at Google Books (I'm sure there's many more, but they locked down my domain a month ago to require CAPTCHA responses every 30 minutes or so, and I've been working on other things). Some of these books are duplicates also, where Google scanned two different copies of the same book. About 6-8 months ago, I ran a search that seemed to max out at about 50,000 books, so it's quite possible that Google is now scanning about 10,000 public domain books a month, which is far more impressive (and more valuable to the public domain) than finding a few more public domain archives and converting their contents to PDF (sorry Michael). On the plus side, Google now makes PDFs of most of the full view books with high resolution images and often has links to Open WorldCat. On the down side, they still seem to be skipping illustrations that don't have page numbers, and often lose a page or two around the illustrations. The PDFs are images only, so they're not really usable in low resolution devices like PDAs and cell phones. I'm still hoping to hear big things from the Open Content Alliance, but I haven't heard a word from them since their opening press releases. At that time, they were planning big things for October 2006, but I don't know if that's still their timeline. From Bowerbird at aol.com Sat Sep 23 17:50:19 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Sat Sep 23 17:50:28 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: [PG-EU] INTERNET FOUNDER SAYS eBOOKS NEXT BIG THING Message-ID: bruce said: > On the plus side, Google now makes PDFs of > most of the full view books with high resolution images that is a good thing. but what makes it even better is that michigan has started making the digital text available too. so instead of just settling for looking at pictures of pages, we can now begin to create honest-to-goodness e-books -- with text that can reflow, and be searched and copied... this week i'll be making posts to the bookpeople listserve that walk people there through the process of doing that. my goal is to digitize a book in _one_ hour. will i succeed? i suppose it depends on how good my automatic tools are. the proof, as you all should know by now, is in the pudding. *** as to the tempest in this teapot here, it's all good... i do appreciate michael's efforts with the world book-fairs. i also appreciate google's massive book-scanning project, which provides us plenty of lemons to make our lemonade, and i appreciate the library at the university of michigan for giving us a powerful lemon-press to make that lemonade... a million e-books might be as little as a million hours away, which puts them _much_ closer than they were 5 years ago. -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060923/dfd33abf/attachment.html From dixonm at pobox.com Sun Sep 24 00:40:36 2006 From: dixonm at pobox.com (Meredith Dixon) Date: Sun Sep 24 00:40:02 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Reusing PG texts In-Reply-To: References: <45159BE6.9080300@pobox.com> Message-ID: <45163674.2090704@pobox.com> Andrew Sly wrote: > For your purposes, it might be best to link > directly to: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/227 Done. Thanks for the correction. That link was right, or I thought it was, back in '99 when we started. And thanks for adding us to your page. > Also, I'm not clear on your objective here. Are you > presenting this merely as a translating exercise, or > are you intending to have a full translation worth > preserving when you are done? Yes, essentially it's a translating exercise. In part, we learn by comparing our work with what others have done with the same passage, and in part we are simply encouraged to keep reading by having a regular budget of lines to do each week. Some of the translations have been very good, and in some ways it is a pity not to make those more widely available, but I doubt the participants would want that. I suppose I could ask once we finish, and I may do so. As for creating a single consensus translation, I'm afraid there are simply too many of us involved to have any chance of producing something which didn't look all too obviously as though it had been designed by a committee. :) So far, 22 people have translated at least one of the twelve books, and another 26 people have joined us for at least one week's work. It doesn't help that we've been working in widely varying styles. I've been creating a slangy, modern prose translation. Other participants have written in a much more elevated style; some idiomatically, others with careful literalism, putting words merely implied by the Latin into brackets. And a few people have made lovely verse translations, although our sentence-by-sentence format makes that hard. I do have a complete archive of the group's output, and most participants have probably kept their own copies for reference as well, so our work will not quite vanish on the wind. -- Meredith Dixon Check out *Raven Days* For victims and survivors of bullying at school. And for those who want to help. From tb at baechler.net Sun Sep 24 01:04:12 2006 From: tb at baechler.net (Tony Baechler) Date: Sun Sep 24 01:01:53 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: [PG-EU] INTERNET FOUNDER SAYS eBOOKS NEXT BIG THING In-Reply-To: <17685.48997.937813.779984@celery.zuhause.org> References: <17685.48997.937813.779984@celery.zuhause.org> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060924004844.0404e8d0@baechler.net> >Bruce writes: >I personally find Michael Hart's counts of his World eBook Fair to be >quite inflated, counting many Project Gutenberg books two or three I've seen this also. There seems to be the main PG site, PGCC, and the former blackmask.com which all seem to have very similar content. I would expect at least three copies of each PG book which adds up to around 50,000 to 60,000 ebooks. That's an impressive number but very much inflated. That doesn't count other overlapping collections that I'm not aware of such as the Widger Library, etc. >On the plus side, Google now makes PDFs of most of the full view books >with high resolution images and often has links to Open WorldCat. On >the down side, they still seem to be skipping illustrations that don't >have page numbers, and often lose a page or two around the >illustrations. The PDFs are images only, so they're not really usable >in low resolution devices like PDAs and cell phones. Yes, and there you point out the major difference between Google and PG. While PG has about 20,000 books and PGCC has more than that, the Google books are pdf images and the PG books are plain text and html. I am blind and really have no way to use pdf images. I can print them to a virtual printer which in turn converts them to text with an OCR engine but this is a pain at the least and often locks up my computer. I recently had a major drive crash and had almost nothing left. Thanks to PG, I at least had reading material. Downloading, unzipping and reading would be impossible with Google. I can extract text from pdf files but only if they are saved as text. Also, PG books have a very low error rate while Google apparently skips and duplicates pages for no reason. For those reasons, I still think that PG is more impressive. It also comes down to how you define an ebook. If an ebook is just a book scanned and turned into page images, your figure is correct. Google has far more than PG. If an ebook is supposed to be useful to the masses and have the same or better accuracy than a printed book, it sounds like PG has more than Google. Anyone can scan a book and put it online but it's much harder to proofread and fix errors. I've read lots of bad scans in my time because that's all I could get. There is another site, Bookshare.org, primarily for the blind. They also offer full texts of books. They always have scanning errors. For legal reasons, they can't go through rounds of proofreading like DP. I'll take PG any day except that almost all of the PG books are prior to 1923 because of the copyright laws. I download books from Bookshare because I have no way to read them otherwise. On the other hand, I've seen some Google book excerpts with reasonably good text quality but it looked like I would have to read the text online which I didn't want to do. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/06 From Bowerbird at aol.com Mon Sep 25 09:19:27 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Mon Sep 25 09:19:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] stealth scannos Message-ID: <57a.56f6e56.32495b8f@aol.com> i'll be addressing the issue of stealth scannos soon, and would like to give p.g./d.p. full credit for the work you've done on it, if someone would write up a summary this week... thank you. -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060925/6b53aa8f/attachment.html From JBuck814366460 at aol.com Wed Sep 27 06:44:50 2006 From: JBuck814366460 at aol.com (Jared Buck) Date: Wed Sep 27 06:44:41 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books Message-ID: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060927/9e1df9f7/attachment.html From desrod at gnu-designs.com Wed Sep 27 07:24:08 2006 From: desrod at gnu-designs.com (David A. Desrosiers) Date: Wed Sep 27 07:31:03 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> Message-ID: <1159367048.10480.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 06:44 -0700, Jared Buck wrote: > Hey, > > I know you can use rsync to make a mirror on your computer of all of > the PG books. I'd like to do this but have it only download the zip > files, excluding everything else. I am using windows for this purpose > so I have cygwin installed with rsync available. I know there's a > command line for rsync available on PG but I need to know how to > change the line so i can tell rsync to get only the zip files and > nothing else. Aaron told me some on here use it so i hope someone on > here can help me :-d Trial and error helps. man 1 rsync helps. This might help: rsync -avzprlHtPS --delete --exclude=[0-9]*.txt --exclude=*.iso \ --exclude=*.rar --exclude=*.ISO --exclude=*.mp3 --exclude=pgdvd* \ user@remote.pg.mirror.site::gutenberg Gutenberg -- David A. Desrosiers desrod gnu-designs com http://gnu-designs.com "Erosion of civil liberties... is a threat to national security." -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060927/bcb38fe3/attachment.bin From brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk Wed Sep 27 07:30:45 2006 From: brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk (Brett Paul Dunbar) Date: Wed Sep 27 08:38:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> Message-ID: hJared Buck writes >Hey, > >I know you can use rsync to make a mirror on your computer of all of >the PG books.? I'd like to do this but have it only download the zip >files, excluding everything else.? I am using windows for this purpose >so I have cygwin installed with rsync available.? I know there's a >command line for rsync available on PG but I need to know how to change >the line so i can tell rsync to get only the zip files and nothing >else.? Aaron told me some on here use it so i hope someone on here can >help me :-d Rsync has an exclude and include option, see the man page available at . To answer the specific question including the options --include "*.zip" --exclude "*" in that specific order in the command line should do the job. The first rule tells rsync to download all the *.Zip files the second to exclude everything not matched by a prior rule. -- Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/ Brett Paul Dunbar To email me, use reply-to address From Bowerbird at aol.com Wed Sep 27 09:46:21 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Wed Sep 27 09:46:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez Message-ID: <4fc.5b0189c.324c04dd@aol.com> boy, it's a good thing branko provoked a confrontation with me by _editing_ my comments over on the teleblog a while back, which led me to abandon that hell-hole. because he's doing a series about how to transform p.g. e-texts into e-books. his tack is to create an .html version (if necessary) which then gets imported into office, which then creates a .pdf... man, you do all that work, and then you end up with a _pdf_? oh geez. oh please. if i was still over there on the teleblah-blah blog, i would be raking this series over the coals, that's for sure. i'm sure glad that i have much better things to do with my time these days... -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060927/1973051d/attachment.html From gbuchana at teksavvy.com Wed Sep 27 16:17:14 2006 From: gbuchana at teksavvy.com (Gardner Buchanan) Date: Wed Sep 27 16:26:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez In-Reply-To: <4fc.5b0189c.324c04dd@aol.com> References: <4fc.5b0189c.324c04dd@aol.com> Message-ID: <451B067A.6080803@teksavvy.com> Bowerbird@aol.com wrote: > his tack is to create an .html version (if necessary) > which then gets imported into office, which then creates a .pdf... > > man, you do all that work, and then you end up with a _pdf_? > I know your bent is to prefer a non-standard lightweight markup for texts, but for those of us considering adding full-on markup, what's the simplest way to handle this? The idea of grovelling through the text in vi and adding tags all over doesn't appeal. I kind-of would have thought importing to an HTML editor, like Dreamweaver or something, and then applying CSS styles and basic text styles to things, then exporting as XHTML would be a good start. ============================================================ Gardner Buchanan Ottawa, ON FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today. From tb at baechler.net Thu Sep 28 01:04:28 2006 From: tb at baechler.net (Tony Baechler) Date: Thu Sep 28 01:02:01 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> Hi Windows rsync users, Just a brief note to tell you that at least for me I get permission problems with the Cygwin port of rsync. It works fine but always sets the date to the system date. I know you can use the archive option to prevent that but all that does is generate an error and still scrambles the original file dates. I looked for a more native port but found none. There is another port with just the necessary Cygwin dll files that sort of worked but still had the same permission problems. I haven't found a solution. I'm on Windows 98 so maybe XP is better about this but my reading of the various Windows ports indicates otherwise. I have to thank David here though. Once I learned about Rsync, I found it to be one of the best tools I've ever used. It's great for copying drives, synchronizing files, or anything else. Now, if I could only get Samba working so well! :-) -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.9/457 - Release Date: 9/26/06 From desrod at gnu-designs.com Thu Sep 28 05:36:48 2006 From: desrod at gnu-designs.com (David A. Desrosiers) Date: Thu Sep 28 05:37:30 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> Message-ID: <1159447008.6197.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 01:04 -0700, Tony Baechler wrote: > > I have to thank David here though. Once I learned about Rsync, I > found it to be one of the best tools I've ever used. It's great for > copying drives, synchronizing files, or anything else. Now, if I > could only get Samba working so well! :-) Just ask. ;) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060928/dc298a50/attachment.bin From desrod at gnu-designs.com Thu Sep 28 05:38:57 2006 From: desrod at gnu-designs.com (David A. Desrosiers) Date: Thu Sep 28 05:39:26 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> Message-ID: <1159447137.6197.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 01:04 -0700, Tony Baechler wrote: > Just a brief note to tell you that at least for me I get permission > problems with the Cygwin port of rsync. It works fine but always > sets the date to the system date. I know you can use the archive > option to prevent that but all that does is generate an error and > still scrambles the original file dates. The problem is your Windows filesystem, which doesn't have the proper metadata in the filesystem inodes to store those attributes. Best to just set up a dedicated BSD or Linux backup/mirror machine and rsync from there, and then share that data across to your Windows machine(s) with Samba. That's pretty much what I do here, but I have a LOT of mirrors loaded up, so its eating an enormous amount of disk space (Wikipedia, CPAN, LDP, Gutenberg, Debian ports, BSD, about 500 Linux/BSD ISO images, system backups and so on). Fun stuff. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060928/632e3371/attachment.bin From brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk Thu Sep 28 06:47:24 2006 From: brett at dimetrodon.demon.co.uk (Brett Paul Dunbar) Date: Thu Sep 28 06:49:13 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] want to rsync all PG books In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> References: <451A8052.3070900@aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060928010039.04089ad0@baechler.net> Message-ID: Tony Baechler writes >Hi Windows rsync users, > >Just a brief note to tell you that at least for me I get permission >problems with the Cygwin port of rsync. It works fine but always sets >the date to the system date. I know you can use the archive option to >prevent that but all that does is generate an error and still scrambles >the original file dates. I looked for a more native port but found >none. There is another port with just the necessary Cygwin dll files >that sort of worked but still had the same permission problems. I >haven't found a solution. I'm on Windows 98 so maybe XP is better >about this but my reading of the various Windows ports indicates otherwise. I use rsync under XP, using a directory containing just rsync.exe cygopt-0.dll and cygwin.dll alongside some batch files rather than a full cygwin installation. I seem to have avoided the problems you are having. I do not attempt to retain the file permissions and use the modify-windows option to take account of the windows time stamps only being accurate to two seconds. The update script I have set up as a *.Bat file is as follows: @rem Updates the root directory and writes the output to a file called gutlog.txt in the current directory, overwriting existing gutlog.txt rsync --recursive --exclude "*/" --relative --links --hard-links --times --sparse --verbose --partial --progress --modify-window=2 --delete ftp@ftp.ibiblio.org::gutenberg h:/gutenberg > gutlog.txt 2>&1 @rem Updates the directory where new stuff is currently being placed and adds the output to gutlog.txt rsync --recursive --exclude "1/9/[0-2]/*" --relative --links --hard-links --times --sparse --verbose --partial --progress --modify-window=2 --delete ftp@ftp.ibiblio.org::gutenberg/1/9/ h:/gutenberg >> gutlog.txt 2>&1 If you remove the exclude rule from the first rsync command you should get a full mirror, I have mine on drive h. e.g. rsync --recursive --relative --links --hard-links --times --sparse --verbose --partial --progress --modify-window=2 --delete ftp@ftp.ibiblio.org::gutenberg h:/gutenberg > gutlog.txt 2>&1 This will create a full mirror on drive h and the full output will be logged as gutlog.txt in the directory from which you ran the script. -- Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/ Brett Paul Dunbar To email me, use reply-to address From Bowerbird at aol.com Thu Sep 28 14:01:18 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Thu Sep 28 14:01:26 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez Message-ID: <267.11679c0e.324d921e@aol.com> gardner said: > I know your bent is to prefer a > non-standard lightweight markup by "lightweight", gardner, i hope you don't mean to imply "deficient in capability", so i'd hope no one will infer that... :+) as for the term "non-standard", i suppose some people have a knee-jerk positive reaction to a "standard", but i'm here with the guy who said that standards are nice "because there are so many to choose from..." someday someone will make z.m.l. a "standard", i suppose. in the meantime, it's just a nifty trick. > I know your bent is to prefer a > non-standard lightweight markup > for texts, but for those of us > considering adding full-on markup, > what's the simplest way to handle this? well, gee, my first recommendation would be to _keep_on_considering_ the adding of full-on markup until you figure out why it is a bad idea... :+) but that's probably not what you thought your question was asking... > The idea of grovelling through the text > in vi and adding tags all over doesn't appeal. it certainly doesn't appeal to me either. fortunately, that shouldn't be necessary. the answer: write a program to apply tags. if the underlying text is consistent enough, it is relatively simply to write routines that can recognize its structure and then tag it. indeed, that's the whole foundation of z.m.l. and it is precisely because the p.g. e-texts are _not_ consistent enough, at their base, to allow this auto-tagging that i've been a constant critic here of e-text inconsistency, even while i love the p.g. library as a whole... but you should take heart when i tell you that -- even despite their danged inconsistency -- it _is_ possible to write routines that decode it, and _could_ tag p.g. e-texts with heavy markup. of course, once you understand on a deep level that it's fully possible for a computer program to ascertain the structure of a text well enough that it can apply markup to permit good presentation by another computer program (e.g., a browser), you will also come to understand on a deep level that there is absolutely no need for the markup, since the structure-ascertaining routines can be included in the browser itself, and thereby avoid the markup middleman. ergo, _zen_markup_... future generations will laugh at us for believing that markup was even necessary in the first place, let alone that we'd codify it into "a standard", and waste our time, money, and energy to "apply" it... -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060928/14a9d292/attachment.html From schultzk at uni-trier.de Fri Sep 29 03:00:04 2006 From: schultzk at uni-trier.de (Schultz Keith J.) Date: Fri Sep 29 03:00:10 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez In-Reply-To: <267.11679c0e.324d921e@aol.com> References: <267.11679c0e.324d921e@aol.com> Message-ID: Hi, "We are still confused, but on a higher level". Am 28.09.2006 um 23:01 schrieb Bowerbird@aol.com: > gardner said: > > I know your bent is to prefer a > > non-standard lightweight markup > [snip, snip] > of course, once you understand on a deep level > that it's fully possible for a computer program to > ascertain the structure of a text well enough that > it can apply markup to permit good presentation > by another computer program (e.g., a browser), > you will also come to understand on a deep level > that there is absolutely no need for the markup, > since the structure-ascertaining routines can be > included in the browser itself, and thereby avoid > the markup middleman. ergo, _zen_markup_... > > future generations will laugh at us for believing > that markup was even necessary in the first place, > let alone that we'd codify it into "a standard", and > waste our time, money, and energy to "apply" it... > I doubt that very much!! Mark-up is a necessity of language and communication wether you see it or not. Humans are the most advanced systems and use far to much information for thier internal "browser" that I do not think mark-ups will be come obsolete in the next couple of centuries. regards Keith. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060929/f5290fad/attachment.html From nwolcott2ster at gmail.com Fri Sep 29 06:43:42 2006 From: nwolcott2ster at gmail.com (Norm Wolcott) Date: Fri Sep 29 06:51:23 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] More copyright Message-ID: <004201c6e3cd$540a4d80$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> What is the copyright status of a book published in England post 1923 (say 1925) and 2 years later in the US. The US copyright was not renewed. a. No US copyright b. 75 years from author's death c. 2019 nwolcott2@post.harvard.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060929/5d6ac4be/attachment.html From greg at durendal.org Fri Sep 29 07:37:00 2006 From: greg at durendal.org (Greg Weeks) Date: Fri Sep 29 08:00:04 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] More copyright In-Reply-To: <004201c6e3cd$540a4d80$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> References: <004201c6e3cd$540a4d80$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Norm Wolcott wrote: > What is the copyright status of a book published in England post 1923 (say 1925) and 2 years later in the US. The US copyright was not renewed. > > a. No US copyright b. 75 years from author's death c. 2019 Was the book still under copyright in England in 1996? -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ From Bowerbird at aol.com Fri Sep 29 11:08:35 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 11:08:46 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez Message-ID: <517.7d6a5e4.324ebb23@aol.com> keith said: > I doubt that very much!! > Mark-up is a necessity of > language?and communication > wether you see it or not. zen markup language _is_ a form of "markup", but it's the "light" kind -- not that _heavy_ stuff -- so it doesn't take much time or money or energy to "apply" it where needed. as to "whether you see it or not", z.m.l. generally tries to be invisible. this is in sharp contrast to the "heavy" kind of markup, which is intrusive to the maximum, with all those angle-brackets and ampersand characters and tags and stylesheet information and javascript and table-markup and lord knows what else is in there, such that the actual _content_ is more or less buried in all of it... do a "view source" on most web-pages these days, and you'll see exactly what i mean. that x.m.l. crap is _definitely_ visible, and it's a visual horror. otherwise, the matter of "visibility" can be kind of a philosophical one, not? can you see the spaces that i have put in-between these words? or how about the line-endings that create a new line under the previous? or the double-line-breaks that put an empty line between paragraphs? can you see an empty line? or not? can you hear silence? i don't know! some people call these spaces and line-breaks "markup", which strikes me as a lame attempt to rescue the concept. but i don't argue with them. i just smile... :+) -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060929/5339caf2/attachment.html From Bowerbird at aol.com Fri Sep 29 12:50:14 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 12:50:29 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 Message-ID: david rothman is advising people not to get caught up in the hype over the "forthcoming" sony reader. your lesson is irony is over for today. -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060929/52fa3e78/attachment.html From Catenacci at Ieee.Org Fri Sep 29 12:54:57 2006 From: Catenacci at Ieee.Org (Onorio Catenacci) Date: Fri Sep 29 12:54:59 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 9/29/06, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote: > david rothman is advising people > not to get caught up in the hype > over the "forthcoming" sony reader. > > your lesson is irony is over for today. > For those of us who came in late :-) , would you please explain why this particular advice is ironic? I mean, who's David Rothman? Gosh, I need to get to the tech websites more often. -- Onorio From Bowerbird at aol.com Fri Sep 29 13:23:12 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Fri Sep 29 13:23:20 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 Message-ID: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> it wouldn't be easy for me to describe david rothman, considering how badly he's treated me over the years -- but hey, i've managed to keep my sense of humor! -- so i'll just refer you to his blog, which you can find here: > http://www.teleread.org/blog/ it's probably best if you read it yourself, and come to your own conclusions, rather than rely on mine, but since you asked, the following is what i will tell you... david works hard on his blog, and it is an excellent source of news from the world of electronic-books, widely defined -- how's that for a kind review from someone he detests? -- but he has to be one of the world's biggest suckers for vapor (hardware and software). he is also one of the "ringleaders" for openreader.com, which he is absolutely convinced will be "the one format to rule them all", so he has been hyping it for _years_, while spewing venom against perceived challengers (which range from little old me all the way up to sony and microsoft and adobe). he sometimes has a very _tenuous_ hold on reality -- he wants adobe to abandon .pdf in favor of _his_ format, to give you an idea -- yet manages to hoodwink a whole lot of people who _should_ be a lot smarter than that. oh, and he'll probably be along here any minute to throw mud on me, because that's what he likes to do to people like me, who have the courage to shake our heads at his stupidities... not that he contributes to the conversation here otherwise -- he strongly prefers to stay on his blog where he is "the expert" -- so i always enjoy when he appears here or anywhere else where i can actually go against him head to head, post to post, because he isn't capable of arguing his way out of a paper-bag, and has to resort to some very low-level ad hominem tactics. anyway, as the _world-leader_ in e-book hype, it made me smile to hear _him_ advise people to take someone's else's hype with a grain of salt. indeed, it was likely my widest smile of the week. besides, with dotreader (the first viewer-program that will be able to actual _use_ his precious format) slipping its dates on a regular basis -- which, as a programmer, i understand, totally, i've slipped a bunch of delivery dates myself, yes sir -- i would expect david to be a bit more forgiving when others (like sony with their hardware and irex with their hardware) find themselves behind on their promises... anyway, more than you wanted to know, i'm sure, and -- like i said -- david will be along any minute now with his bucket of mud, so the fun has just begun, but hey, you asked! ;+) -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060929/bbc0f302/attachment.html From jon at noring.name Fri Sep 29 18:07:48 2006 From: jon at noring.name (Jon Noring) Date: Fri Sep 29 18:14:24 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 In-Reply-To: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> References: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> Message-ID: <585031741.20060929190748@noring.name> Bowerbird wrote: > [out of the blue, a whole bucketful of mud dumped on David > Rothman -- snipped...] > > anyway, more than you wanted to know, i'm sure, and > -- like i said -- david will be along any minute now with > his bucket of mud, so the fun has just begun, but hey, > you asked!???????? ;+) Am I the only one to see who is really slinging the mud here? Jon From bruce at zuhause.org Fri Sep 29 18:42:25 2006 From: bruce at zuhause.org (Bruce Albrecht) Date: Fri Sep 29 18:42:31 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 In-Reply-To: <585031741.20060929190748@noring.name> References: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> <585031741.20060929190748@noring.name> Message-ID: <17693.52097.561423.370292@celery.zuhause.org> Jon Noring writes: > Bowerbird wrote: > > > [out of the blue, a whole bucketful of mud dumped on David > > Rothman -- snipped...] > > > > anyway, more than you wanted to know, i'm sure, and > > -- like i said -- david will be along any minute now with > > his bucket of mud, so the fun has just begun, but hey, > > you asked!???????? ;+) > > Am I the only one to see who is really slinging the mud here? Perhaps, but as one of the other ringleaders of the OpenReader cabal I hardly think you're unbiased, Jon. From Catenacci at Ieee.Org Sat Sep 30 03:59:28 2006 From: Catenacci at Ieee.Org (Onorio Catenacci) Date: Sat Sep 30 03:59:31 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 In-Reply-To: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> References: <385.b86050d.324edab0@aol.com> Message-ID: On 9/29/06, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote: > it wouldn't be easy for me to describe david rothman, > considering how badly he's treated me over the years > -- but hey, i've managed to keep my sense of humor! -- > so i'll just refer you to his blog, which you can find here: > > http://www.teleread.org/blog/ > > it's probably best if you read it yourself, and come to > your own conclusions, rather than rely on mine, but > since you asked, the following is what i will tell you... > > david works hard on his blog, and it is an excellent source > of news from the world of electronic-books, widely defined > -- how's that for a kind review from someone he detests? -- > but he has to be one of the world's biggest suckers for vapor > (hardware and software). he is also one of the "ringleaders" > for openreader.com, which he is absolutely convinced will be > "the one format to rule them all", so he has been hyping it for > _years_, while spewing venom against perceived challengers > (which range from little old me all the way up to sony and > microsoft and adobe). he sometimes has a very _tenuous_ > hold on reality -- he wants adobe to abandon .pdf in favor of > _his_ format, to give you an idea -- yet manages to hoodwink > a whole lot of people who _should_ be a lot smarter than that. > > oh, and he'll probably be along here any minute to throw mud > on me, because that's what he likes to do to people like me, > who have the courage to shake our heads at his stupidities... > > not that he contributes to the conversation here otherwise -- > he strongly prefers to stay on his blog where he is "the expert" > -- so i always enjoy when he appears here or anywhere else > where i can actually go against him head to head, post to post, > because he isn't capable of arguing his way out of a paper-bag, > and has to resort to some very low-level ad hominem tactics. > > anyway, as the _world-leader_ in e-book hype, it made me smile > to hear _him_ advise people to take someone's else's hype with > a grain of salt. indeed, it was likely my widest smile of the week. > > besides, with dotreader (the first viewer-program that will be > able to actual _use_ his precious format) slipping its dates > on a regular basis -- which, as a programmer, i understand, > totally, i've slipped a bunch of delivery dates myself, yes sir -- > i would expect david to be a bit more forgiving when others > (like sony with their hardware and irex with their hardware) > find themselves behind on their promises... > > anyway, more than you wanted to know, i'm sure, and > -- like i said -- david will be along any minute now with > his bucket of mud, so the fun has just begun, but hey, > you asked! ;+) > Ah thank you for that recap. -- Onorio From nwolcott2ster at gmail.com Sat Sep 30 07:37:40 2006 From: nwolcott2ster at gmail.com (Norm Wolcott) Date: Sat Sep 30 07:38:35 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] More copyright References: <004201c6e3cd$540a4d80$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: <000701c6e49e$05528e60$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Choice (b) was meant to take care of that. Say the author died in 1955.. I ask this because the works of Lewis Spence (d. 1955) published in the late 1920's, whose US copyrights expired, have been reprinted recently by Dover, and were also reprinted in the US in the 1960's shortly after the expiration of the US copyright. The 1960 reprint carried a copyright notice but did not mention the prior English publication nor the US publication, so the copyright may have applied only to the "new" material. If the works were PD in the US in the 1960's, perhaps their re-publication then created a pd US version? nwolcott2@post.harvard.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Weeks" To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 10:37 AM Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] More copyright > On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Norm Wolcott wrote: > > > What is the copyright status of a book published in England post 1923 (say 1925) and 2 years later in the US. The US copyright was not renewed. > > > > a. No US copyright b. 75 years from author's death c. 2019 > > Was the book still under copyright in England in 1996? > > -- > Greg Weeks > http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d From Bowerbird at aol.com Sat Sep 30 12:33:08 2006 From: Bowerbird at aol.com (Bowerbird@aol.com) Date: Sat Sep 30 12:33:14 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] oh geez, part 2 Message-ID: jon said: > Am I the only one to see who > is really slinging the mud here? i did not resort to anything ad hominem. i said unflattering things, yep i sure did!, but if any of them do not jibe with reality, then by all means feel free to express that. if i agree that i overstepped appropriateness, i will be more than happy to issue an apology. while i talk about the issues, david attacks me _personally_, (and strays from the truth too), instead of addressing my points. that's my definition of mudslinging. anyway, i rarely mention david at all, and probably shouldn't have gone on after that initial post, but somebody _did_ ask. (and i think that i was fair by advising him to read david's blog and make up his own mind about it.) -bowerbird -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/gutvol-d/attachments/20060930/5a8d6aab/attachment.html From greg at durendal.org Sat Sep 30 13:59:55 2006 From: greg at durendal.org (Greg Weeks) Date: Sat Sep 30 13:59:57 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] More copyright In-Reply-To: <000701c6e49e$05528e60$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> References: <004201c6e3cd$540a4d80$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> <000701c6e49e$05528e60$640fa8c0@atlanticbb.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Norm Wolcott wrote: > Choice (b) was meant to take care of that. Say the author died in 1955.. > > I ask this because the works of Lewis Spence (d. 1955) published in the late > 1920's, whose US copyrights expired, have been reprinted recently by Dover, > and were also reprinted in the US in the 1960's shortly after the expiration > of the US copyright. The 1960 reprint carried a copyright notice but did not > mention the prior English publication nor the US publication, so the > copyright may have applied only to the "new" material. If the works were PD > in the US in the 1960's, perhaps their re-publication then created a pd US > version? I asked about 1996 specifically because that is when URAA/GATT brought a number of non-US works back under copyright in the US. There were a number of works published prior to 1996 as legitimate public domain and that are not after 1996. I won't claim to fully understand the rules, but one of the requirements was that the work still be under copyright in 1996 in the home country for GATT to apply. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38b.pdf -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/ From j.hagerson at comcast.net Sat Sep 30 20:16:19 2006 From: j.hagerson at comcast.net (John Hagerson) Date: Sat Sep 30 20:16:49 2006 Subject: [gutvol-d] PG Examples of XHTML and CSS? Message-ID: <000001c6e507$f9bb6ee0$1f12fea9@sarek> If I remember correctly, someone was creating PG texts using CSS and XHTML, but I don't remember who it was. I would like to see an example that uses these technologies. The W3.org website has all of the information, but sometimes it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack to find the answer to a specific question. If someone could provide the name of the poster or an e-book number, that would be very helpful. Thank you.