Need an Intervention Before I Jump (SWRB)

[DMcFadden]

* They "claim" that there are more than 500 MP3s not available on Sermonaudio.
* I already referenced not having access to EEBO (which is known to me but unavailable).

After a couple of the comments in this thread, I will probably just pick and choose to download what I want when it becomes relevant to me. But, don't underestimate the immense amount of time it takes to scan and convert 500,000 pages of rare books, which cannot be found in the same location. It would be wonderful if a reputable ministry would take on this kind of challenge. Or, if someone with legal access to EEBO could obtain permission to package some collections of rare Puritan books.

Most of the rare books in the EEBO inventory are the type used by graduate students at schools with plenty of money for their subscription fees. However, the subset of books we are talking about are rare Puritan and Reformed titles that are of interest to a wider group than grad students in some dusty English department. Many on the PB would probably be in the market for them if they could be provided.

 

[DonP]

El Tirano put the link to this and more on his post? Seems with old works there is no copyright even if digitized. Thoughts?

There are plate tectonic implications for Christian companies who have built their business model on threatening to take to court anyone who reproduces their work in cases where the heart of their work is a public domain work that was written centuries ago. Threats of legal action and the underlying claims of copyright are not sustained by the law.

Unless Christian businesses making money off selling digitized copies of works in the public domain can demonstrate they have added significant original or creative content--not hyperlinks, standardization of Scripture references, formatting, or indexing, for instance--their claim of copyright is baseless, legally. Further, threatening that they will take users to court if they share the public domain text with others is contrary to the explicit command of Scripture--that we are not to go to court against one another.

For too long, Christians have been nave concerning these claims and have allowed themselves to be intimidated by the threat of legal action. Who wants another Christian accusing one of being a thief?

But works of dead fathers in the faith are in the public domain and no matter how much money and time Christian businessmen have spent scanning, OCRing, and proofing those texts as they take them from analog to digital media, the courts are clear that they may not copyright that work.

For businessmen to claim otherwise is to mislead the public.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

For out of copyright and public domain works, it is the value added that is copyrighted. I.e. a new translation that is someone's new work, scholarly additions, notes, editing, etc. The original work can't be copyrighted; but photolithing a new work with any or all of the value added is pretty much violating the copyright of the new work. This is what I do, and that is what I"m copyrighting when I put out a new edition of an old work. That is also why I don't do photo reprints.

 

[py3ak]

If I recall accurately, notes and editing are creative work - adding Scripture references is not. In the cases reviewed by Tim Bayly, at any rate, the courts held that only creative work, not sweat work, could be copyrighted.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

That's interesting. When all is said and done, it pays to create a critical edition with notes, commentary, new translations, etc.

If I recall accurately, notes and editing are creative work - adding Scripture references is not. In the cases reviewed by Tim Bayly, at any rate, the courts held that only creative work, not sweat work, could be copyrighted.

 

[Kevin]

We have a brother on this board that has first hand, pastoral experience with the "Barrow Boys".

So I will defer to those with first hand experience.

I will say that the majority consenses among those that have had dealings with the barrows is uniformly negative.

 

[Whitefield]

Can the formatting of a text be copyrightable? I don't mean the text of, say, Owen, clearly that is outside copyright, but how the text is formatted in a book or even on a web page, if there is something unique (and possibly work-intense) about the formatting?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Let's start a new thread on this.
Stand by.
?

Can the formatting of a text be copyrightable? I don't mean the text of, say, Owen, clearly that is outside copyright, but how the text is formatted in a book or even on a web page, if there is something unique (and possibly work-intense) about the formatting?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

That may be; but there are more than two brothers so let's not paint with too broad a brush. Also, I think enough warning/opinion of SWRB material has been given and we don't need to enter into this sad tale any further.
Thread closed.

We have a brother on this board that has first hand, pastoral experience with the "Barrow Boys".

So I will defer to those with first hand experience.

I will say that the majority consenses among those that have had dealings with the barrows is uniformly negative.