[? PD] 2 WWII memoirs certified PD by HathiTrust

[elsieselwyn]

I found these two memoirs about WWII in the Pacific Theater while browsing HathiTrust and thought someone might find them interesting.

Remember Pearl Harbor
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006571375
Revised edition's copyright was renewed so iffy on whether someone might claim it as PD or not. See thread below for more details.

Coral and Brass
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000807510

[TriciaG]

Blake Clark (Remember Pearl Harbor) died in 2003.

I'm having trouble finding the death year of Percy Finch, co-author of Coral and Brass.

[elsieselwyn]

Blake Clark (Remember Pearl Harbor) died in 2003.

I'm having trouble finding the death year of Percy Finch, co-author of Coral and Brass.

Oh thank you, Tricia, for looking that up! I couldn't find Percy Finch's year of death either. Out of curiosity, if we could not find the year, would we then treat the text as not PD for those in 70+ year after author death countries?

[TriciaG]

In this case, I would. Since he co-wrote a WWII memoir, chances are pretty good that he died after 1952. But the lead author died in 1967, so even if Finch died in 1946, it'd still not be PD for Life+70.

[elsieselwyn]

In this case, I would. Since he co-wrote a WWII memoir, chances are pretty good that he died after 1952. But the lead author died in 1967, so even if Finch died in 1946, it'd still not be PD for Life+70.

Ah okay! Makes sense.

[flavo5000]

In this case, I would. Since he co-wrote a WWII memoir, chances are pretty good that he died after 1952. But the lead author died in 1967, so even if Finch died in 1946, it'd still not be PD for Life+70.

That's only for non-US people though right? US copyright is based on publish date.

Remember Pearl Harbor it looks like has a copyright renewal on it so that one is definitely out anyway.

Coral & Brass, on the other hand, doesn't appear to have a renewal on it (based on Stanford's DB) and both authors are from the US. So this one may actually be PD. If you really want to read it though, you'd probably need to get someone to clear it with Project Gutenberg to be on the safe side. It's highly unlikely it was ever previously published in a magazine that had a copyright renewal on it (which Stanford's DB doesn't search for), but it's technically possible.

[TriciaG]

It looks like the renewal is for the 1943 revised edition, whereas this is the 1942 original. (Edit to add: but that does throw some shadow on the book as a project, in that someone may claim copyright on it after cataloging, and Archive might take it down due to somewhat vague evidence.)

You almost gave me a heart attack - we just begin to trust HathiTrust's copyright statements, and you throw that curve ball. LOL!

And yes, all the death date stuff only concerns those outside the US.

[flavo5000]

It looks like the renewal is for the 1943 revised edition, whereas this is the 1942 original. (Edit to add: but that does throw some shadow on the book as a project, in that someone may claim copyright on it after cataloging, and Archive might take it down due to somewhat vague evidence.)

You almost gave me a heart attack - we just begin to trust HathiTrust's copyright statements, and you throw that curve ball. LOL!

And yes, all the death date stuff only concerns those outside the US.

Ah, if it's the revised edition (I didn't look at the record too closely) then the copyright would only apply to the new aspects of the book. If there isn't a renewal for the original one, this should be ok then. Either way, I think Coral & Brass would be almost certainly ok to record.

[elsieselwyn]

Ah, if it's the revised edition (I didn't look at the record too closely) then the copyright would only apply to the new aspects of the book. If there isn't a renewal for the original one, this should be ok then. Either way, I think Coral & Brass would be almost certainly ok to record.

Out of curiosity, what is the Stanford DB tool you are using to check for cppyright renewal?

Edit: nevermind, I found it. What a useful tool!

[annise]

One of the many problems with USA copyright of post 95 years stuff is that it is very easy to show that something is in an exceptions table but not so easy to prove that something that should be isn't.

Anne

[flavo5000]

Ah, if it's the revised edition (I didn't look at the record too closely) then the copyright would only apply to the new aspects of the book. If there isn't a renewal for the original one, this should be ok then. Either way, I think Coral & Brass would be almost certainly ok to record.

Out of curiosity, what is the Stanford DB tool you are using to check for cppyright renewal?

Edit: nevermind, I found it. What a useful tool!

The thing to remember with that Stanford tool is that it only contains book renewals and doesn't include periodicals, pamphlets, etc. There are actually quite a few books where the copyright renewal was on the original publication of it in a magazine. Just for an example, I was somewhat recently interested in doing Donovan's Brain by Curt Siodmak, and a search of the Stanford DB found nothing. But it turned out it had been published in Black Mask magazine a few years earlier and was copyright renewed there. So no Donovan's Brain for me.

[elsieselwyn]

The thing to remember with that Stanford tool is that it only contains book renewals and doesn't include periodicals, pamphlets, etc. There are actually quite a few books where the copyright renewal was on the original publication of it in a magazine. Just for an example, I was somewhat recently interested in doing Donovan's Brain by Curt Siodmak, and a search of the Stanford DB found nothing. But it turned out it had been published in Black Mask magazine a few years earlier and was copyright renewed there. So no Donovan's Brain for me.

Good to know! How did you find out it was published in a magazine first? Is there another place to look for copyright renewals on periodicals and pamphlets?

I apologize if I am bothering you with too many questions

[flavo5000]

The thing to remember with that Stanford tool is that it only contains book renewals and doesn't include periodicals, pamphlets, etc. There are actually quite a few books where the copyright renewal was on the original publication of it in a magazine. Just for an example, I was somewhat recently interested in doing Donovan's Brain by Curt Siodmak, and a search of the Stanford DB found nothing. But it turned out it had been published in Black Mask magazine a few years earlier and was copyright renewed there. So no Donovan's Brain for me.

Good to know! How did you find out it was published in a magazine first? Is there another place to look for copyright renewals on periodicals and pamphlets?

I apologize if I am bothering you with too many questions

Project Gutenberg actually has catalogs of all copyright renewals here: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/search/?query=copyright+renewal
It's incredibly daunting to search across all of them though. Greg Weeks (gweeks on here) is the guy who gets a lot of the non-renewed sci-fi added to PG and is the one who helped me with it.
Honestly, unless it's a book you are REALLY passionate about, I'd suggest just sticking to <1927 works for simplicity's sake unless you're willing to do some grunt work to get it cleared with PG. Also, there have been a few post 1927 texts that have been cleared with PG that haven't actually been submitted through the process yet that you can search for here: https://inprogress.pglaf.org/

[elsieselwyn]

Project Gutenberg actually has catalogs of all copyright renewals here: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/search/?query=copyright+renewal
It's incredibly daunting to search across all of them though. Greg Weeks (gweeks on here) is the guy who gets a lot of the non-renewed sci-fi added to PG and is the one who helped me with it.
Honestly, unless it's a book you are REALLY passionate about, I'd suggest just sticking to <1927 works for simplicity's sake unless you're willing to do some grunt work to get it cleared with PG. Also, there have been a few post 1927 texts that have been cleared with PG that haven't actually been submitted through the process yet that you can search for here: https://inprogress.pglaf.org/

Yes - I agree with you that that seems very daunting to do. I will stick with the obviously PD things for the forseeable future. But I appreciate just knowing how it works

[annise]

But I appreciate just knowing how it works

Well actually none of us know. None of us are international copyright lawyers. Or even experts in their own country's laws, but by sticking to the basic rules we are unlikely to be taken to court even if we are right and Haithi is designed to make texts available to member Universities to read and to then know if they can quote them in articles without permission not to publish them in an alternative medium as we do.

Anne
"Weep not for what we have not, rejoice in what we have"