Hi, Gerard.
I supose you know what is paleography. And therefore you know that there is an intrinsic value in a raw manuscript, which provides information about schools of calligraphy, styles... an ancient manuscript is something like a painting masterpiece. All those things can't be transmitted by the sole transcription. Even more, a single fuzzy letter can challenge the whole interpretation of the whole manuscript.
An example: The "Cantar de Mio Cid" codex ends with this blurry datation:
**Quien escrivió este libro de Dios paraíso, amen* *Per Abbat le escrivió en el mes de mayo en era de mil e. CC XLV años* *
(May God give the paradise to the one who wrote this book, Amen Abbot Peter wrote this book in the month of May of the era of thousand and CC (gap) XLV year)
Well: the sole gap launched hard discussions lasting decades, because some schollars stated that a C was deleted. You can imaginate that the solution came from paleographic studies.
Now: think about that hebrew have had no vowels until mesorah. Transcription can not be taken seriously in any conceivable way. Any transcription issue, and I assure that will be thousands of them need to be backed in the same manuscript. The high informative value of the manuscript is *the main reason for copywriting it.*
All this *high value* information will be lost for the free kwnoledge with the copywright, and its a very bad idea. It's a lost chance for the free knowledge movement to resign.
So, please, Gerard, you know that I'm your fan, but understand that some people can feel disappointed about this copywriting and they want to make something about it.
Yes, of course: we must be firmly polite, we must be patient and try to explain the advantages of a public domain or at least a free licence over the time, but we must not give up.
So, Gerard,