[Foundation-l] largest free content website

[John Vandenberg]

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 8:16 PM, M. Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I just think any repository that lets some non-free works slip through
> the cracks by accident, can't suddenly be disqualified unless we're ready to
> disqualify Wikipedia too. So what category do we fit into that they do not?

I wouldn't disqualify any project which is effectively employing best
efforts to remove non-free content.

My limited browsing of Open Source Books project indicates it is
mostly junk and has a very high percentage of non-free content, and
that it doesn't appear that they are staying on top of it.

The Million Book Project is a bit better, but they often don't include
sufficient metadata and I've seen many works with a year of
publication that is post 1950 yet "pre-1923" is used as the public
domain justification.

Here are two that I noted as copyrighted back in May.
http://www.archive.org/details/DeskWorkEnglishGrammer
http://www.archive.org/details/PearsCyclopaedia

Here is one of a series that I noted as copyrighted back in 2008.
http://www.archive.org/details/americasmusic030111mbp

--
John Vandenberg