Recording PD works that have no openly accessible online text

[RobMarland]

Hi,

I am wondering whether it is possible to record PD works that have no openly accessible online text.

Specifically, I am thinking of newspaper articles published before the cut off. Some newspaper archives are openly accessible, but others put articles behind paywalls. I understand that the scans themselves can be under copyright and so cannot be openly shared. However, presumably the text itself would be PD.

Notwithstanding the practical problem of PLing, is it permissible to record such works? Is a link to an openly accessible online text a prerequisite for inclusion in the LV catalogue?

Thanks

[ej400]

Hi,

I am wondering whether it is possible to record PD works that have no openly accessible online text.

Specifically, I am thinking of newspaper articles published before the cut off. Some newspaper archives are openly accessible, but others put articles behind paywalls. I understand that the scans themselves can be under copyright and so cannot be openly shared. However, presumably the text itself would be PD.

Notwithstanding the practical problem of PLing, is it permissible to record such works? Is a link to an openly accessible online text a prerequisite for inclusion in the LV catalogue?

Thanks

This would depend. Sites we use like gutenberg and archive give people permissions to record or whatever using their website, however some sites prefer that you do not. Every site is different, and if they request or even have a policy that you don't use their site we won't record from it because we don't want to deal with legal issues.

Otherwise we cannot record from a book. Say the reader and the DPL buy the same book from amazon. The listener would have to buy that same book. We'd be advertising the book, basically, and for another it's free audiobooks. So "free" websites to record from

[TriciaG]

Otherwise we cannot record from a book

Yes, we can. If the book is PD, we can record from a hard copy. You must send in a photo/scan of the title and copyright pages so the MC can verify its PD-ness. That's the only requirement. PLs don't have to read along with the text for standard PL, so that wouldn't be an issue. (Another option is that the possessor of the physical book can scan/photo all the book pages and upload the book to Archive.)

Regarding paywalls: the MC has to be able to verify the PD-ness of the material. That would be your biggest sticking point. Second sticking point is if you want the PL to read along with the text while PLing.

[RobMarland]

Regarding paywalls: the MC has to be able to verify the PD-ness of the material. That would be your biggest sticking point. Second sticking point is if you want the PL to read along with the text while PLing.

Thanks, Tricia.

In the specific case I am thinking of, I have paid for access to newspaper archives and have downloaded texts for my own research, which they allow. The articles were published in the 1880s, so I would assume that the text itself is unambiguously PD, right? So when you say that a sticking point would be the MC confirming that the texts are PD, do you mean that the MC would have to be able to see the text, to confirm that it is a real text (and I'm not reading something I just made up)? Or that the MC would have to look for evidence in the text that it is PD (e.g. publication date)?

I don't think I could share a scan of the article on an open thread because, unlike a book's title page, often the articles are so short that to share some of it is to share the whole thing. But I could imagine sharing it privately. Sound possible?

And I think what you said about sharing a scan of the title page of a book answers my question about the necessity of an open link for everything in the catalogue: in that case there would be no link. So, as I understand it, links are desirable but not required.

[TriciaG]

Right. If you read from a hard copy book or otherwise not-readily-accessible text, we verify that the edition you're reading from is clearly PD, (i.e. published 1923 or earlier. We couldn't/wouldn't OK any of the more ambiguous, "published after 1923 but copyright not renewed" texts).

We're trusting you to record from that specific edition and not some other one, and that you're recording the whole thing as written (no omissions of objectionable words, substitutions of objectionable words, or inclusion of something that isn't in the original).

And, correct: there would be no e-text link on the catalog page at completion.

[RobMarland]

OK, thanks, Tricia, that clears it up for me. So I can proceed (on the proviso that I can convince an MC to do a little more work than a standard project requires).

[annise]

That's not quite fair Rob, it's not a case of MCs not wanting to do things, it's a case of doing our best to make sure LV does not seem to break the law.

Anne

[RobMarland]

That's not quite fair Rob, it's not a case of MCs not wanting to do things, it's a case of doing our best to make sure LV does not seem to break the law.

Anne

Excuse me, Anne -- I think this is one of those instances where nuance is lost in writing. I fully appreciate the situation. I mean it quite literally: I will have to find an MC who is willing to do a bit of extra work than is normally expected, which I will be grateful for.

[dlolso21]

Rob,

I have read the thread and at this point am curious.

David O