[Hitch]

Originally Posted by barryem

I don't think you get the concept of orphaned books. Those are books whose ownership is so obscure that it's not possible or at least extremely expensive to find the owner and offer to pay them. There are a lof of such books and none of them are ancient books. Ancient books are out of copyright.

Like?

It's not possible to determine the value of any given book. You might find it worthwhile and I might not. Or the other way around. That's how it is when judging a book. It's a very different situation when looking at books as a whole. It's hard to say none of those books have value. It's almost certain some do. But they're lost to us now and by the time their copyrights expire they'll have been forgotten and many will be lost forever.

I agree that it's impossible to judge the value of any given book, for the reasons stated. I tend to disagree that in this day and age, any book remotely current will expire and be lost forever, if only because a) someone will probably try to sell a bootleg copy on Amazon or b) Gutenberg and any inheritors/successors will probably try to keep it alive, as well, but...it could happen, yes.

Of course, I'd point out that it's happened throughout history, regardless of copyright provisions. All this angstSturms sturm und Drang is truly down to the digital age because previously, nobody thought that they'd go grab someone's now-PD book and scan it, convert it, keep it, etc. You'd just buy a copy of the book, someplace in time, and hang on to it. Like so many other things, the digital age's capabilities are driving this entire discussion.

It's very unusual for books to stay in print beyond the first year. In his introduction to the 25th anniversary edition of "Pillars of the Earth" Ken Follet explains that most of his books were best sellers but Pillars never sold more than a modest amount. But all his other books were out of print a year later and Pillars kept selling just enough to keep it in print so that 25 years later it had sold more than all his other books combined.

Y'know, I've read Follett for dog's years, and I think the idea that his books were OOP after a year is a bit of an exaggeration.

The point is that most of his books were best sellers and were out of print after a year. That's the normal situation.

This seems bizarre to me. What publishing house would willingly NOT print more copies fo a book that's in high demand, like a best-seller? I seem to recall--in Follett's case, specifically--seeing at least one of his books on the tables at B&N for quite a long time. I mean, Brown's DaVinci Code was on the bestseller list for what, two years? Obviously, they didn't stop printing copies, and why on earth would they? Does that seem sensible to anyone?

Now that we have ebooks and keeping books, which don't go "out of print" the problem of lost and forgotten books becomes a much bigger problem.

Can you elaborate?

Also, as discussed in the video I linked to yesterday, all books are based on other books or other people's ideas. Public domain means we all own them. And we do. They're part of our culture. Part of what makes us who we are. They are us!

Barry

We certainly all own the PD books. No argument there.


Hitch