I'll ask, but I don't think they plan to do more. Yet. The project has several phases, and in phase I, the info is available on the website, but they have not done much to spread the word. The Faculty of Theology at Copenhagen University is the first place that is actively involved. The rest of the university is in later phases. Regards, Ole On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Andrew Gray <andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk>wrote;wrote: -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588

The library assumes that everything pre-1900 is out of copyright, and yes: There are two projects - e-books on demand (EOD) and digitizing on demand (DOD). EOD is an Europeana project where the user pays for time spent (iirc), while DOD is Royal Library only, and free. The time frames are as you mentioned, Jonathan. Oh, David: please do not move too fast - the people involved in the DOD project need to catch their collective breaths (I also need some of the to write Wikipedia articles) :-) -Ole On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org>wrote;wrote: -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588

I have now ordered "Glossarium norvagicum, eller, Forsøg paa en Samling af saadanne rare norske Ord som gemeenlig ikke forstaaes af danske Folk, tilligemed en Fortegnelse paa norske Mænds og Qvinders Navne, Det fælles Sprog til Oplysning og Forbedring" from 1749 to find out :-) On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org>wrote;wrote: -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588

Hi Ole, The link works for me! It's too bad that they don't include a link to the Creative Commons Public Domain Mark but refer to their general copyright page. I wonder if it's possible to embed a licence URI/URL in a PDF-file's header? Cheers, David --- David Haskiya Product Developer www.europeana.eu ________________________________ From: glam-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:glam-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ole Palnatoke Andersen Sent: donderdag 8 november 2012 13:54 To: Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public] Cc: wikida-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org; redaktionen(a)runeberg.org; wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [GLAM] Library e-books on demand The book has been digitized now. I can see it at http://www.kb.dk/e-mat/dod/130019427200.pdf You may or may not be able to see it. Regards, Ole On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen &lt;ole(a)palnatoke.org&gt; wrote: I have now ordered "Glossarium norvagicum, eller, Forsøg paa en Samling af saadanne rare norske Ord som gemeenlig ikke forstaaes af danske Folk, tilligemed en Fortegnelse paa norske Mænds og Qvinders Navne, Det fælles Sprog til Oplysning og Forbedring" from 1749 to find out :-) On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Jonathan Gray &lt;jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org&gt; wrote: Great - thanks Ole! So - from the point of view of prospective reusers - does this mean that e-books from DOD can be freely circulated and reused (as per opendefinition.org)? E.g. will scanned e-books or digital editions be made available with a legal waiver (Public Domain Mark / CC0) or equivalent "no rights reserved" legal disclaimers? J. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen &lt;ole(a)palnatoke.org&gt; wrote: The library assumes that everything pre-1900 is out of copyright, and yes: There are two projects - e-books on demand (EOD) and digitizing on demand (DOD). EOD is an Europeana project where the user pays for time spent (iirc), while DOD is Royal Library only, and free. The time frames are as you mentioned, Jonathan. Oh, David: please do not move too fast - the people involved in the DOD project need to catch their collective breaths (I also need some of the to write Wikipedia articles) :-) -Ole On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jonathan Gray &lt;jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org&gt; wrote: Great news! While it looks like pre-1600 and 1601-1700 will be only available via EEBO for people outside DK (which requires a fairly hefty institutional subscription fee?), the 1701-1900 texts appear to be freely available? Does anyone know about the legal status / license / terms of use of these texts? J. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen &lt;ole(a)palnatoke.org&gt; wrote: Hi! The Royal Library in Copenhagen has started making free e-books on demand from Danish 1701-1900 books in their collections. By doing this, they get more usage but less wear and tear and more space in the reading room :-) More on http://www.kb.dk/en/nb/samling/dod/index.html Regards, Ole -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588 <tel:%2B4522934588> _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam -- Jonathan Gray Head of Community The Open Knowledge Foundation http://www.okfn.org http://twitter.com/jwyg _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588 <tel:%2B4522934588> _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam -- Jonathan Gray Head of Community The Open Knowledge Foundation http://www.okfn.org http://twitter.com/jwyg _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list GLAM(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588 <tel:%2B4522934588> -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588

On 1 November 2012 13:46, Jonathan Gray &lt;jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org&gt; wrote: Is this a little risky? I'm all for making definitely-PD material available, but I would assume that a good proportion of late-19th century material is potentially still in copyright - the traditional "safe" cutoff date is around 1870. Unless it checks on a case-by-case basis, the KB would be tagging material that is likely to still be in copyright, and while it's probably safe for them to make it available, I don't know if we should be encouraging using PD marks for possibly unfree material. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

My concern is mainly that I think the benefit of the PD mark comes from it being a confident statement by the institution - if it becomes used for "probably public domain", it loses a lot of its value. That said, incorporating the flowcharts (plus something like Arrow) would be great, if it's practical! (It depends a lot on cataloguing quality - if you need to check the item, it makes it a lot trickier.) FWIW, the British Library's study of using Arrow as a copyright-clearance system managed to identify a 151-year case (a work published at 14 by someone who lived to 98; PD last year.). So very conservative is very conservative indeed ;-) http://pressandpolicy.bl.uk/Press-Releases/Electronic-clearance-of-Orphan-W… - Andrew. On 9 November 2012 00:02, Jonathan Gray &lt;jonathan.gray(a)okfn.org&gt; wrote: -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk