Waverley Encyclopedia scanned - Commons-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

Waverley Encyclopedia scanned

Public art and copyrights in the US

Creative Commons wants your input...

David Gerard

24 Dec 2011 24 Dec '11

5:19 p.m.

http://fentonville.co.uk/waverley/ Put up by a J.G.Ballard fan, but those who like old encyclopedias will enjoy this. The colour plates would definitely be of historical interest. I've suggested Commons and Wikisource to Mike Bosnall, but you don't need to wait on that to grab anything good. - d.

Reply

Show replies by date

Maarten Dammers

24 Dec 24 Dec

11:42 p.m.

Hi David, Op 24-12-2011 18:19, David Gerard schreef:

http://fentonville.co.uk/waverley/ Put up by a J.G.Ballard fan, but those who like old encyclopedias will enjoy this. The colour plates would definitely be of historical interest. I've suggested Commons and Wikisource to Mike Bosnall, but you don't need to wait on that to grab anything good.

What PD license (template) would this be? It would be easy to transfer all these pdf's to Commons as one big book. Maarten

Reply

David Gerard

11:52 p.m.

On 24 December 2011 23:42, Maarten Dammers <maarten(a)mdammers.nl> wrote:

Op 24-12-2011 18:19, David Gerard schreef:

> http://fentonville.co.uk/waverley/ > Put up by a J.G.Ballard fan, but those who like old encyclopedias will > enjoy this. The colour plates would definitely be of historical > interest. I've suggested Commons and Wikisource to Mike Bosnall, but > you don't need to wait on that to grab anything good.

What PD license (template) would this be? It would be easy to transfer all these pdf's to Commons as one big book.

Thaaaaat's ... a good question. Front page says "undated, but internal evidence suggests it was produced in the 1920s." It would have fallen out of copyright in the UK by now. It would not have been published in the US. geni, what would your knowledge of UK copyright quirks make of this? If it's OK, it would probably be worth asking Mike Bonsall for the original TIFF scans, rather than what we have here, which is TIFFs wrapped in PDF. Unless there's an easy programmatic method of extracting the TIFF at full resolution, which would be strictly better than the PDF versions in all cases. - d.

Reply

geni

25 Dec 25 Dec

4:09 a.m.

On 24 December 2011 23:52, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 24 December 2011 23:42, Maarten Dammers <maarten(a)mdammers.nl> wrote:

Op 24-12-2011 18:19, David Gerard schreef:

> http://fentonville.co.uk/waverley/ > Put up by a J.G.Ballard fan, but those who like old encyclopedias will > enjoy this. The colour plates would definitely be of historical > interest. I've suggested Commons and Wikisource to Mike Bosnall, but > you don't need to wait on that to grab anything good.

What PD license (template) would this be? It would be easy to transfer all these pdf's to Commons as one big book.

Thaaaaat's ... a good question. Front page says "undated, but internal evidence suggests it was produced in the 1920s." It would have fallen out of copyright in the UK by now. It would not have been published in the US. geni, what would your knowledge of UK copyright quirks make of this?

Standard life+70 (okey technically some slightly reduced moral rights under Provision 79(6)(b) but meh). Bits of it might be public domain (if you can argue that the individual articles and images constitute separate works) but most of it probably isn't (assuming they followed the standard model of getting a bunch of junior employes or academics to do most of the work). In the US it's PD if pre 1923. Otherwise 95 years after publication. -- geni

Reply

David Gerard

10:57 p.m.

On 25 December 2011 04:09, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> geni, what would your knowledge of UK copyright quirks make of this?

Standard life+70 (okey technically some slightly reduced moral rights under Provision 79(6)(b) but meh). Bits of it might be public domain (if you can argue that the individual articles and images constitute separate works) but most of it probably isn't (assuming they followed the standard model of getting a bunch of junior employes or academics to do most of the work). In the US it's PD if pre 1923. Otherwise 95 years after publication.

Hm. Does life+70 also apply to works for hire? (Is there case law on this question?) I assume the hypothetical academics sold all rights in the work, not just first publication rights or similar. - d.

Reply

geni

26 Dec 26 Dec

3:21 p.m.

On 25 December 2011 22:57, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 25 December 2011 04:09, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> geni, what would your knowledge of UK copyright quirks make of this?

Standard life+70 (okey technically some slightly reduced moral rights under Provision 79(6)(b) but meh). Bits of it might be public domain (if you can argue that the individual articles and images constitute separate works) but most of it probably isn't (assuming they followed the standard model of getting a bunch of junior employes or academics to do most of the work). In the US it's PD if pre 1923. Otherwise 95 years after publication.

Hm. Does life+70 also apply to works for hire?

Yes. UK law doesn't really have the same distinction in length when it comes to corporate copyright as the US. -- geni

Reply

Ryan Kaldari

27 Dec 27 Dec

10:10 a.m.

Oliver Keyes would be a good person to ask (okeyes(a)wikimedia.org) - He's a British lawyer with lots of copyright knowledge. Ryan Kaldari On 12/24/11 3:42 PM, Maarten Dammers wrote:

Hi David, Op 24-12-2011 18:19, David Gerard schreef:

http://fentonville.co.uk/waverley/ Put up by a J.G.Ballard fan, but those who like old encyclopedias will enjoy this. The colour plates would definitely be of historical interest. I've suggested Commons and Wikisource to Mike Bosnall, but you don't need to wait on that to grab anything good.

What PD license (template) would this be? It would be easy to transfer all these pdf's to Commons as one big book. Maarten _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply

4502

days inactive

4505

days old

commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

6 comments

4 participants

tags (0)

participants (4)

David Gerard
geni
Maarten Dammers
Ryan Kaldari