On Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Jason Scott wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015, William Donzelli wrote:
In closing, I might ask you to consider taking your sweet time getting
this stuff online. There are still some manual dealers out there. Let
them handle the decline of their business in whatever way they see fit.
All of them know it is just a matter of time - probably five years or
less. If you flood the net with the free scans, it might really fuck
them up. I know some of them, and it is not unreasonable for me to
think that they might get really annoyed by your efforts and burn their
libraries just for spite.
That is a most interesting metric. I honestly hadn't considered that
issue. The key, I think, will be communication with them to understand
which manuals have sales going on, and which ones it would be
advantageous to get online because they have long dropped into
historical myths. Thank you for the advice. All of it.
I have to disagree strongly with Will on this. There are quite a few "PDF
manual dealers" who honestly deserve to go out of business. Those
"dealers" tend to fall into two categories:
First, the large number who have built their PDF libraries from collecting
everything they can find online. Quite often they'll take the work of
hobbyists and simply watermark / lock (encrypt) the PDF file then offer it
for sale. Some of these "dealers" have websites, while others just try to
hock their wares on eBay and other ecommerce platforms.
Second, those that threaten others when they find a PDF manual online
which competes with their offerings. Some of them will file bogus DMCA
takedowns even though they are not the copyright holder. Some of these
"dealers" try to assert that because they scanned a manual (...or claim to
have scanned it), that /they/ then hold the exclusive copyright to the PDF
version of that manual.
Copyright just doesn't work like that though...the original copyright
holder /still/ holds the copyright, no matter if someone scans it to a PDF
or makes a xerox copy. Under US copyright law, they cannot even make a
"sweat of the brow" argument as that is not an accepted legal argument
under US copyright law.
17 U.S. Code ยง 103 - Subject matter of copyright: Compilations and
derivative works
"(b) The copyright in by the author of such work, as distinguished from
the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any
exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is
independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration,
ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting
material."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/103
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow
