Project Gutenberg

[jamiethearcher]

So book Copyrights have a 75 year lifespan? But what if they are still selling 75 years later? I'm sure Alexandre Dumas wrote The Man in the Iron Mask more than 75 years ago, but I just put out $7 for it the other day. Didn't the publishing company buy the rights to print that book, even after 75 years? I'm sure these online publishers have bought rights to the book, but how about the millions of people that will use those resources, get to read entire books without ever putting out a penny for the priveledge. It'll put the book service out of buisness! I better stock up on my printed novels, in 20 years they'll all be gone and I can make a fortune selling antique codexes!
I can hear myself now, telling my grandchildren about the old-fashoned 'paper books,' back when we ate cheeseburgers and used that silly gasoline stuff

the way it works is that, once its copy right expires, its in the public domain, and ANYONE can publish it. the publisher you purchased it from didnt pay anything for its rights, becuase no one "owns"it anymore.

@ PADMA - thanks for the link! ill look into that

 

[aneeshm]

I wish it were in PDF format though.

Not a problem . Download Open Office , open the text file in open office , change the font to your liking , and click "Export to PDF" . That gives you a nice PDF file in whatever font and size you are comfortable reading with .

That's what I do , at least , and it gives nice results .

 

[7ronin]

I read a couple of books there.

Which ones?

Answer this question and you are entitled to one free complimentary scratch.

 

[Bartleby]

I downloaded a lot from there, but as with my paper bookshelf I never seem to find the time for it.

 

[mdwh]

So book Copyrights have a 75 year lifespan? But what if they are still selling 75 years later? I'm sure Alexandre Dumas wrote The Man in the Iron Mask more than 75 years ago, but I just put out $7 for it the other day. Didn't the publishing company buy the rights to print that book, even after 75 years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length

Most countries have at least life plus 50 years. The UK and USA have life plus 70 years, however anything before 1923 in the USA is public domain.

The author of that book died in 1870 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Dumas,_père ), and so his works are certainly out of copyright. Who cares if they are still selling, it's not like the guy will benefit from it. If you paid for it, you paid for the book and printing costs, not the intellectual property. Things which are freely available (as in speech) may still be charged for if someone wishes (i.e., not free as in beer) - consider public domain software, or Linux.

I'm sure these online publishers have bought rights to the book, but how about the millions of people that will use those resources, get to read entire books without ever putting out a penny for the priveledge. It'll put the book service out of buisness!

All the while there is a market for printed books, they will stay in business. And if no one wants printed books, who cares if they go out of business.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

Which ones?

Call of the Wild and White Fang.

 

[Urederra]

And why drug patents only have a 20 years lifespan? (I think is 20 years, but I am not sure. I am sure is less than 75 years, since patents for drugs like AZT are now expired.

I also want a 75 years lifespan for my patents.

 

[Bartleby]

If patents lasted 75 years, research would stop.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

Has anyone been to this site?

The purpose of Project Gutenberg is to put books that are now in the public domain on the internet so that people can access them freely.

I have read several books from here, and enjoyed them all. Its great because I can load many of them onto my PDA, so I always have a choice of great works to read.

I've been to the site. It's pretty cool. I just hesitate to use my PDA for reading because I've found my screen to be too small. I have a Treo 600.

 

[Urederra]

If patents lasted 75 years, research would stop.

Depends on the patent.

It is true that you can stop research due to a patent, Heck, we had to reject a Bill Gates grant to develop a drug against malaria because a french patent that describes the DNA sequence of the enzime under investigation covers too much. Bad assignated patents stop research, that's for sure.

But how do you stop research if the patent for AZT lasts, let's say 50 years? It didn't stop investigation of new drugs against HIV. And, IMHO, the benefit would be that farmaceutical companies would have more time to make a profit, so they can sell their drugs for less money. They might need some regulation to enforce them to sell cheaper drugs, though.

 

[Padma]

I don't really want to threadjack this thread, but ...

Copyrights and patents are actually in place to allow the subject in question to move into the public domain! (At least, that was the original intention.) The concept is, ideas should be freely available to everyone else, to spur innovation, both in practical (patent) matters, and in more intangible (copyright) ideas. But it didn't seem fair that an author/inventor could get no practical income from his idea. So copyright was invented, to give the originator control over his ideas for a limited time. Copyright was originally for 7 years, and then they added the possibility of a 7-year extension. Then it became 14, and 28, and then Disney decided they needed to keep Mickey Mouse under copyright when his first pictures were due to expire (along with other media companies with their products). So the major media forces launched a little-observed, low-key political campaign to get copyright changed. After lining the pockets of quite a few politicians, they got the copyright laws changed to their benefit. "Life of the author, plus 75 years".. And for a corporate subject, like Mickey Mouse, it's even longer. Absolutely ridiculous. And this was also the source of the DMCA, and other even more draconian copyright proposals.

 

[Bartleby]

@ Urederra: I was just being overly cynical about the pharmaceutical companies. I know that in reality drug companies struggle to recoup their research budgets during the lifetime of their patents because the unsuccessful candidates cost so much.

 

[jamiethearcher]

I don't really want to threadjack this thread, but ...

Copyrights and patents are actually in place to allow the subject in question to move into the public domain! (At least, that was the original intention.) The concept is, ideas should be freely available to everyone else, to spur innovation, both in practical (patent) matters, and in more intangible (copyright) ideas. But it didn't seem fair that an author/inventor could get no practical income from his idea. So copyright was invented, to give the originator control over his ideas for a limited time. Copyright was originally for 7 years, and then they added the possibility of a 7-year extension. Then it became 14, and 28, and then Disney decided they needed to keep Mickey Mouse under copyright when his first pictures were due to expire (along with other media companies with their products). So the major media forces launched a little-observed, low-key political campaign to get copyright changed. After lining the pockets of quite a few politicians, they got the copyright laws changed to their benefit. "Life of the author, plus 75 years".. And for a corporate subject, like Mickey Mouse, it's even longer. Absolutely ridiculous. And this was also the source of the DMCA, and other even more draconian copyright proposals.

Not threadjacking at all. I think project gutenburg is a great idea, and if you can help inform people about what its providing by explaining the context, more power to you!

 

[mdwh]

"Life of the author, plus 75 years".. And for a corporate subject, like Mickey Mouse, it's even longer.

Actually, although it's 95 years ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright ), that's a fixed length from publication, and not the author's death. So for an author who lives at least another 25 years, he is better off than a company would be.

But I agree with the rest of your post, either way these are absurdly long lengths of time. I think it's particularly ridiculous that the terms have been extended retroactively, and not just for new works. When an author/artist/programmer gives his work to a company, he does so under the terms of current copyright law - will his salary be increased retroactively? Of course not - it's a law which allows companies to change their side of the contract afterwards, without the employee's consent.

A better rule of thumb for US copyright law is "Before Mickey Mouse, it's public domain; after Mickey Mouse, it'll copyrighted indefinitely".

 

[Padma]

A better rule of thumb for US copyright law is "Before Mickey Mouse, it's public domain; after Mickey Mouse, it'll copyrighted indefinitely".

Very well put!