Horror James, M. R.: Ghost Stories of M.R. James (complete collect,illus). v2. 31 May 2016

[banjomike]

Any chance of including A Night in King's College Chapel? It certainly isn't a fragment of a story so would seem to qualify for inclusion. Even The Fenstanton Witch is described as "complete but rough".

[GrannyGrump]

Hmm. Well, frankly, I am hesitant to post any of the stuff that M.R. James did not actually submit for publication (it would seem that "A Vignette" was the last story he submitted before he died, although it was not published till nearly a year later).

Copyright is claimed by "N.J.R. James" for the various fragments, from 1985 through 2007. I assume this might be a relative/estate heir. Transcription copyright is claimed by Rosemary and [sometimes] Darroll Pardoe.

I don't know how much editing was done by the transcribers. Also, in some legal venues, items published posthumously have their copyright beginning with publication date (not the author's death date).

If anyone can provide information that these can be legitimately posted here, I would be glad to make a supplemental book for these.

[pynch]

In most European countries, all of James’s writings published before 2007 became public domain in 2007. Texts first published in or after 2007 get a 25 year protection.

Switzerland (whose copyright laws we have to follow here) doesn’t have extra provisions for texts published after the end of the standard copyright term, so you can use all of these texts, if Japanese law is fine with it. But most Europeans wouldn’t be allowed to download them, if you include texts from 2007 on.

[GrannyGrump]

Ha. Well, they were all published in 2001 in the book "A Pleasing Terror", so it would seem they are fair game.

I have the texts of the above-mentioned, and most of the others. So, this will be an up-coming post.

Thank you pynch, for the assist. (Isn't it terrible that we have to know about so much legalese, just so we can indulge in a favorite hobby?)

[pynch]

Originally Posted by GrannyGrump

(Isn't it terrible that we have to know about so much legalese, just so we can indulge in a favorite hobby?)

It is, indeed, but it can be fun to find the loopholes—Switzerland forgetting to protect new texts or scholar’s editions, for example.

[GrannyGrump]

Originally Posted by pynch

—Switzerland forgetting to protect new texts or scholar’s editions, for example.

What does that mean? New texts, meaning "new books"? Sounds like a free-for-all! Surely I must be mis-understanding that...

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by GrannyGrump

Ha. Well, they were all published in 2001 in the book "A Pleasing Terror", so it would seem they are fair game.

But if that was their initial publication, they would still be protected by copyright - in the EU, at least. The first person to publish a posthumous work gets a one-time 25-year copyright on it, even if the work would otherwise be in the public domain. This is done to encourage publication of posthumous works.

[pynch]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But if that was their initial publication, they would still be protected by copyright - in the EU, at least. The first person to publish a posthumous work gets a one-time 25-year copyright on it, even if the work would otherwise be in the public domain. This is done to encourage publication of posthumous works.

They get this 25-year copyright only if the work would otherwise be in the public domain. Texts published posthumously during the standard 70-year copyright term become public domain when the 70 years are over.

[pynch]

… and it’s article 4 of this EU directive.

[GrannyGrump]

Originally Posted by pynch

They get this 25-year copyright only if the work would otherwise be in the public domain. Texts published posthumously during the standard 70-year copyright term become public domain when the 70 years are over.

So this means that, since James died in 1936, ANY of his work published prior to 2007 is within his [EU] life+70 limit, and ALL PUBLISHED BEFORE 2007 became public domain in 2007. Am I stating that correctly?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by GrannyGrump

So this means that, since James died in 1936, ANY of his work published prior to 2007 is within his [EU] life+70 limit, and ALL PUBLISHED BEFORE 2007 became public domain in 2007. Am I stating that correctly?

I believe so, yes. But the problem with unfinished fragments found on web sites is that you have no way of knowing if or how extensively they've been edited, and it would therefore be legally risky to reproduce them.

[GrannyGrump]

frankly, I am hesitant to post any of the stuff that M.R. James did not actually submit for publication

Yes indeed. That was my initial feeling. HarryT, your comment makes me swivel back to that stance.

So, I guess I am a wishy-washy wimp!

[pynch]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I believe so, yes. But the problem with unfinished fragments found on web sites is that you have no way of knowing if or how extensively they've been edited, and it would therefore be legally risky to reproduce them.

As long as they were, in this case, published online before 2007, it doesn’t matter at all if they were edited. And only “critical and scientific” editions published after 2006 could get a new protection term of up to 30 years, correcting some typos isn’t enough. (article 5 of above-mentioned directive)

[pynch]

And let me add: Switzerland does not protect late first publications or new scientific editions, so both would be fine on MR (if the uploader is within his home country’s rights to upload them; for downloaders the usual rules apply.)

[GrannyGrump]

Arggghhhh! I am giving myself a whiplash! I just don't want to get the site in trouble with a take-down notice by some publisher or estate heir.

I wish there were some reliable final authority who would say "Yes, do it!" or "No, don't touch it!" So many "maybe's" and "mights" and "seems to mean" are making my head spin.