Text Policy: Historic & Going Into 2019

[TriciaG]

We would like to reiterate our text policy as 1923 approaches. This is the same policy we have for all texts which are automatically PD in the US (1922 and earlier through December 31).

Texts acceptable for LV:
* Scans of works which show the publication year as being 1923 or earlier
* Texts available on Gutenberg.org, whose copyright status in the "bibrec" tab shows as PD in the USA (see note below)
* Texts available as "full view" on HathiTrust.org
* Texts from other sites that state clearly which edition the text came from, and that do not restrict the use of their text with a CC or other license (gutenberg.au, bartleby.com, and plenty of others)

Sources that share transcribed works (works rendered into html) without a clear statement of what edition they came from aren't allowed, just like they're not allowed for 1922 works. Wikisource is not acceptable unless it has a scan that clearly shows a publication date of 1923 or earlier, because they restrict use of the texts with a CC license.

We know everyone wants to jump into 1923, and the excitement is building! But we still need to follow our regular text policies when we burst into the new year.

In other news...

We have learned that Distributed Proofreaders (which feeds into Project Gutenberg) aren't working on any 1923 texts yet. Like here, they won't be starting any 1923 projects until January 1.

Concern has been expressed about posting book suggestions for 1923 texts. It is fine to make a list of books entering the PD soon, but let's not link to texts themselves until January 1. (Personally, I have a huge list of 1923 works with links that is sitting patiently on my desktop.) It's better not to take any risks on this.

The good news? As of right now, it's only 2 weeks, 14 hours Eastern Time until 2019!

[mightyfelix]

Thank you for the clear explanation! I had been planning to use Gutenberg Canada as a source for one book I'd like to do (it's already PD there), but I just went to check the entry for it again, and it says that they used a later edition for their source. 29th printing, I think it said. So that means it still won't be usable, and I'll need to find a first edition scan somewhere?

[TriciaG]

Thank you for the clear explanation! I had been planning to use Gutenberg Canada as a source for one book I'd like to do (it's always PD there), but I just went to check the entry for it again, and it says that they used a later edition for their source. 29th printing, I think it said. So that means it still won't be usable, and I'll need to find a first edition scan somewhere?

Yes, you'd need to find a ≤1923 edition. Don't quote me on this, but I think if we could compare a scan with the later edition html version, and if they're the same, you could use the html. We'll deal with situations like that on an individual basis.

[Eidyiaa]

I am SOOOOO excited for all the new books coming into the public domain. LV is going to be VERY busy this year! Are there any threads within Book suggestions where people are discussing the works they would like to do once the new year hits?

[annise]

No - we decided it was better to wait till they are PD this is an open public forum that abides by USA laws.

Anne

[DACSoft]

In the meantime, there are hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of books copyrighted in 1922 and earlier that haven't been recorded yet, so there is still a wide selection from which to choose.

Don

[mightyfelix]

I am SOOOOO excited for all the new books coming into the public domain. LV is going to be VERY busy this year! Are there any threads within Book suggestions where people are discussing the works they would like to do once the new year hits?

You're more than welcome to contribute to the podcast I'm organizing! Check the "Release Party" link in my signature. As long as you don't include any excerpts from the book(s) you're interested in, there will be no harm in talking about them.

[soupy]

What about a text like this?
* Texts available as "full view" on HathiTrust.org

The metalogicon of John of Salisbury: a twelfth-century defense of the verbal and logical arts of the trivium translated with an introd. & notes by Daniel D. McGarry.

John of Salisbury https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Salisbury

https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001381658

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1955.

Translated by Daniel Michael McGarry 1842-1903
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Michael_McGarry

Craig

[TriciaG]

What about a text like this?
* Texts available as "full view" on HathiTrust.org

The metalogicon of John of Salisbury: a twelfth-century defense of the verbal and logical arts of the trivium translated with an introd. & notes by Daniel D. McGarry.

John of Salisbury https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Salisbury

https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001381658

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1955.

Translated by Daniel Michael McGarry 1842-1903
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Michael_McGarry

Craig

It's full view at HathiTrust, so it's OK to use. They have a team that does diligent copyright clearance, like Gutenberg.org, so they're trustworthy. (This appears to be a reprint with no edits that call for a new copyright.)

[soupy]

Thanks