Munseys [free ebooks] - KICKED THE BUCKET? - Page 3

HarryT · 12-27-2018, 05:43 PM

This book is absolutely NOT in the public domain. It was published in 1961 and the author died in 1988.

issybird · 12-27-2018, 06:07 PM

I think it's possible that the copyright wasn't renewed, which given it was published in 1961 would mean it's in the US public domain. I checked the Stanford database of copyright renewals between 1923 and 1963 and couldn't find it. That doesn't mean I didn't miss it, but a book published in 1961 isn't automatically copyright protected. Copyrights weren't automatically renewed until 1964.

issybird · 12-27-2018, 06:13 PM

Free download at manybooks.net:

https://manybooks.net/titles/willefo...whip_hand.html

GtrsRGr8 · 12-27-2018, 08:44 PM

Excuse me if I'm wrong, and showing my ignorance, but maybe it will give better-informed MobileReaders an opportunity to chime in with more accurate information.

I thought that I have read several times that the public domain status in one country is irrelevant to what it is in another country. So, the laws about when a work goes into the public domain may differ from country to country (and probably will). People in another country from where the copyright was issued (or possibly what country that the copyright holder now resides, if different from where the copyright was issued) the copyright holder must follow the laws where the copyright was issued, not the country where someone wants to make copies of it.

I glanced over the books that LolaMilano wanted, and all of the web addresses for the books had "uk" in them. Perhaps those were what pdurrant keyed in on. Those caught my eye immediately.

Of course, if the copyright holder wants to relinquish his or her rights to a book, he/she is completely free to do so. I don't know if he/she has to do that country-by-country or not, or if relinquishing the right within the country where the copyright holder resides or the publisher is domiciled (in the case of a company owning a copyright, such as Conde Naste, referred to in an earlier post on this thread) is all that matters. I would think that the latter is correct

I wish that as many countries as possible would get together and create some common standards among all of them about copyright laws. It sure would save a lot of headaches for people who care about following the law, but are daunted by the prospect of all of the research necessary to find out the copyright status of a book that they want to own.

BTW--I've read--in an excellent post on the subject in a post or two here on MobileRead in this forum--that the people in the U.S. making the rules about such things are working toward simplying the rules and changing the time periods that copyrights issued here in the U.S. can last. If I can, I'll try to find that post tonight (but my ability to understand how to do searches on this Site is very limited--I don't know if I'll be able to find it).

To LolaMilano: This is a longshot. However, I have seen, on a very few publishers' websites, solicitation by them to customers for books that they (the customers) would like to see reprinted. I think that that is cool, for one reason, it makes someone else (the publisher) have to do all of the research to find out if a work is still in copyright.

Since I didn't think that I would ever want to avail myself of that offer, I didn't bother to remember the names of those reprinters, but I will in the future.

bgalbrecht · 12-27-2018, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

Excuse me if I'm wrong, and showing my ignorance, but maybe it will give better-informed MobileReaders an opportunity to chime in with more accurate information.

I thought that I have read several times that the public domain status in one country is irrelevant to what it is in another country. So, the laws about when a work goes into the public domain may differ from country to country (and probably will). People in another country from where the copyright was issued (or possibly what country that the copyright holder now resides, if different from where the copyright was issued) the copyright holder must follow the laws where the copyright was issued, not the country where someone wants to make copies of it.

I glanced over the books that LolaMilano wanted, and all of the web addresses for the books had "uk" in them. Perhaps those were what pdurrant keyed in on. Those caught my eye immediately.

Of course, if the copyright holder wants to relinquish his or her rights to a book, he/she is completely free to do so. I don't know if he/she has to do that country-by-country or not, or if relinquishing the right within the country where the copyright holder resides or the publisher is domiciled (in the case of a company owning a copyright, such as Conde Naste, referred to in an earlier post on this thread) is all that matters. I would think that the latter is correct

I wish that as many countries as possible would get together and create some common standards among all of them about copyright laws. It sure would save a lot of headaches for people who care about following the law, but are daunted by the prospect of all of the research necessary to find out the copyright status of a book that they want to own.

BTW--I've read--in an excellent post on the subject in a post or two here on MobileRead in this forum--that the people in the U.S. making the rules about such things are working toward simplying the rules and changing the time periods that copyrights issued here in the U.S. can last. If I can, I'll try to find that post tonight (but my ability to understand how to do searches on this Site is very limited--I don't know if I'll be able to find it).

To LolaMilano: This is a longshot. However, I have seen, on a very few publishers' websites, solicitation by them to customers for books that they (the customers) would like to see reprinted. I think that that is cool, for one reason, it makes someone else (the publisher) have to do all of the research to find out if a work is still in copyright.

Since I didn't think that I would ever want to avail myself of that offer, I didn't bother to remember the names of those reprinters, but I will in the future.

I suspect that the issue is that Mobileread.com is based in Switzerland, which is a life+70 country, so while you can link to a public domain book in a different country, you can't upload it here unless the author died before 1949 (at the time of this posting).

HarryT · 12-28-2018, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

I suspect that the issue is that Mobileread.com is based in Switzerland, which is a life+70 country, so while you can link to a public domain book in a different country, you can't upload it here unless the author died before 1949 (at the time of this posting).

Exactly right.

pdurrant · 12-28-2018, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LolaMilano

And yes, I uploaded a PDF - but it's not copyrighted material;

It's possible that the book you uploaded didn't have its copyright renewed in the US, and so is in the public domain in the United States of America.

Mobileread is an international forum. We do not allow uploads of works that are still until the life+70 copyright length.

pdurrant · 12-28-2018, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LolaMilano

Ok, LOUD AND CLEAR - but just so I'm clear: I didn't ask for *pirated copies*, I asked for resources to places where I could find cool old pulp books. OR the books themselves. I was requesting "lingo", and "plot devices" from the Film Noir era.

You asked for links to be sent to you privately, " incase Conde Nast is watching... "

If you weren't asking for unauthorised copies on in-copyright works, why would you be worried about Conde Nast watching?

issybird · 12-28-2018, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdurrant

You asked for links to be sent to you privately, " incase Conde Nast is watching... "

If you weren't asking for unauthorised copies on in-copyright works, why would you be worried about Conde Nast watching?

Because she didn't want to tip off Condé Nast to legitimate copies of works in the public domain, in fear that they'd attempt to reacquire the copyright? That was my interpretation.

pdurrant · 12-28-2018, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by issybird

Because she didn't want to tip off Condé Nast to legitimate copies of works in the public domain, in fear that they'd attempt to reacquire the copyright? That was my interpretation.

It is not possible to re-acquire copyright in public domain titles, except through legislation.

issybird · 12-28-2018, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdurrant

It is not possible to re-acquire copyright in public domain titles, except through legislation.

Copyright has been reestablished, which word I should have used. I didn't read the OP's request as being for pirated works, just to sources she could access.

pdurrant · 12-28-2018, 09:45 AM

The book posted was not in the public domain in life+70 countries, but was in the public domain in the USA. There's no way without legislation for the USA publisher to re-acquire or reestablish copyright in that work, or any other work that has fallen into the public domain in the USA without legislation.

Keeping quiet so that the copyright holder doesn't notice that you're violating a valid copyright doesn't seem very ethical to me.

I do accept that the post was made in ignorance, not malice, and I was a little harsh in my comment.

12-27-2018, 08:44 PM	#34
GtrsRGr8 Grand Sorcerer Posts: 7,334 Karma: 27815322 Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Southeastern U.S., ya'll Device: Kindle; Kindle (10.1.1) for PC; Kindle Cloud Reader	Excuse me if I'm wrong, and showing my ignorance, but maybe it will give better-informed MobileReaders an opportunity to chime in with more accurate information. I thought that I have read several times that the public domain status in one country is irrelevant to what it is in another country. So, the laws about when a work goes into the public domain may differ from country to country (and probably will). People in another country from where the copyright was issued (or possibly what country that the copyright holder now resides, if different from where the copyright was issued) the copyright holder must follow the laws where the copyright was issued, not the country where someone wants to make copies of it. I glanced over the books that LolaMilano wanted, and all of the web addresses for the books had "uk" in them. Perhaps those were what pdurrant keyed in on. Those caught my eye immediately. Of course, if the copyright holder wants to relinquish his or her rights to a book, he/she is completely free to do so. I don't know if he/she has to do that country-by-country or not, or if relinquishing the right within the country where the copyright holder resides or the publisher is domiciled (in the case of a company owning a copyright, such as Conde Naste, referred to in an earlier post on this thread) is all that matters. I would think that the latter is correct I wish that as many countries as possible would get together and create some common standards among all of them about copyright laws. It sure would save a lot of headaches for people who care about following the law, but are daunted by the prospect of all of the research necessary to find out the copyright status of a book that they want to own. BTW--I've read--in an excellent post on the subject in a post or two here on MobileRead in this forum--that the people in the U.S. making the rules about such things are working toward simplying the rules and changing the time periods that copyrights issued here in the U.S. can last. If I can, I'll try to find that post tonight (but my ability to understand how to do searches on this Site is very limited--I don't know if I'll be able to find it). To LolaMilano: This is a longshot. However, I have seen, on a very few publishers' websites, solicitation by them to customers for books that they (the customers) would like to see reprinted. I think that that is cool, for one reason, it makes someone else (the publisher) have to do all of the research to find out if a work is still in copyright. Since I didn't think that I would ever want to avail myself of that offer, I didn't bother to remember the names of those reprinters, but I will in the future. Last edited by GtrsRGr8; 12-27-2018 at 08:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Girl Who Kicked The Hornets Nest	mushroomyakuza	Sony Reader	19	01-28-2010 06:13 AM
Kicked out of book when turning page	Tinwolf	HanLin eBook	16	11-06-2009 02:06 PM
E-books kicked into high gear (at least in South Korea)	Colin Dunstan	News	1	02-09-2006 07:47 AM

12-27-2018, 05:43 PM	#31
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	This book is absolutely NOT in the public domain. It was published in 1961 and the author died in 1988.

12-27-2018, 06:07 PM	#32
issybird o saeclum infacetum Posts: 21,297 Karma: 234636059 Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: New England Device: Mini, H2O, Glo HD, Aura One, PW4, PW5	I think it's possible that the copyright wasn't renewed, which given it was published in 1961 would mean it's in the US public domain. I checked the Stanford database of copyright renewals between 1923 and 1963 and couldn't find it. That doesn't mean I didn't miss it, but a book published in 1961 isn't automatically copyright protected. Copyrights weren't automatically renewed until 1964.

12-27-2018, 06:13 PM	#33
issybird o saeclum infacetum Posts: 21,297 Karma: 234636059 Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: New England Device: Mini, H2O, Glo HD, Aura One, PW4, PW5	Free download at manybooks.net: https://manybooks.net/titles/willefo...whip_hand.html

12-28-2018, 09:45 AM	#42
pdurrant The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠 Posts: 73,978 Karma: 315160596 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Norfolk, England Device: Kindle Oasis	The book posted was not in the public domain in life+70 countries, but was in the public domain in the USA. There's no way without legislation for the USA publisher to re-acquire or reestablish copyright in that work, or any other work that has fallen into the public domain in the USA without legislation. Keeping quiet so that the copyright holder doesn't notice that you're violating a valid copyright doesn't seem very ethical to me. I do accept that the post was made in ignorance, not malice, and I was a little harsh in my comment.

Advert

Advert