>You can let us know what you find out :-)

here's the update:

check in with the gutenberg folks, and from my *cursory* research it seems
as though ebook #17 is indeed the 1981 version of the book of mormon.

here's the quick analysis:

ebook #17 is *not*:
1830 because there are verses present
1837 because there are verses present
1852 because there are verses present
1879 because in 1 Nephi 18:18 the text "with sorrow" is present, which is
not in the 1879 version
1920 because in 2 Nephi 30:6 the text "white and delightsome" is missing,
which is present in the 1920 version

conclusion:
ebook #17 *is* the 1981 edition because in 1981 the change of "pure and
delightsome" was exclusively introduced into 2 Nephi 30:6.

so greg newby and michael hart from the gutenberg project have been
helpful - michael says that he remembers using a 1909 copy for proofreading
back in 1991, but it's entirely possible that other volunteer proofreaders
could've used a 1981 version and turned the 1909 text into a 1981 version.

michael said he recalls having extensive discussions with the church, and
although no paperwork was exchanged, they approved of the gutenberg copy,
though they explicitly asked him not to publish the doctrine & covenants and
pearl of great price.

michael says he would gladly make any changes to ebook #17 to get it back in
line with the pre-1923 text.

anyway, that's the update.  i'll check in with the church on this one and
see if they are aware and okay with the 1981 text being in the public
domain.  i'll give another update when i receive more information.

just trying to do the right thing. ;-)

Josh Coates
www.jcoates.org



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Josh Coates
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:36 AM
To: BYU Unix Users Group
Subject: RE: [uug] [OT] Scriptures



>Maybe you can write to the Church's IP division and ask them if what they
>say about the text being in the public domain is true? You can let us know
>what you find out :-)

from the docs on PG (http://www.gutenberg.org/howto/copyright-howto.php) it
lists 8 tests to check if a book is able to be copied into the project.

it looks to me like the 1981 book of mormon doesn't pass any of the tests.

also, submitting the book (http://copy.pglaf.org/) requires a scan of the
title page and copyright notice.  the copyright notice on the 1981 copy of
the book of mormon is pretty clear, so i dont see how it could've gotten
into the project.

anyway, i wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and inquired about the text and it's
date and copyright.  they may be able to shed some light on this.

depending on the response i get from pglaf.org, i'll write to the church and
ask them what the copyright status is of their 1981 publication.

just seems to me that the best way to get a set of records screwed up is to
make lots of different copies of it that are easy to edit and let everyone
have free reign over them.  copy editing is hard - and transcription is
really hard - mistakes happen.  i'd just assume people not get into the "cut
& paste entire books of holy writ" business without explicit permission and
cooperation from the church.

Josh Coates
www.jcoates.org

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ross Werner
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 6:47 PM
To: BYU Unix Users Group
Subject: RE: [uug] [OT] Scriptures


On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Josh Coates wrote:

>> I personally can't find anywhere where it claims to be the 1830 version?
>
> i can't find any reference to that either.  i wonder what version it is?
> i'd have to do some more homework to figure that one out.

>From a quick search, it seems to be the 1981 text ("pure and delightsome",
"joy of our whole army", etc).

a) I tend to agree with the wikisource discussion that the minor changes
in the 1981 text are not substantial enough to warrant a new copyright
(especially since many of them apparently are simply reversions to the
original manuscript).

b) I may not trust Mr. Dibb or wikisource discussions to say that the text
is in the public domain, but I definitely trust Michael Hart. He goes well
out of his way to ensure that anything on PG is public domain (or clearly
marked otherwise), so if it's on PG, I'm convinced. (And it looks like Mr.
Dibb just got his copy from PG, too.)

Maybe you can write to the Church's IP division and ask them if what they
say about the text being in the public domain is true? You can let us know
what you find out :-)

   ~ Ross

--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group
http://uug.byu.edu/

The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author.  They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG.
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list




--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group
http://uug.byu.edu/

The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author.  They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG.
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list




--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 

The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author.  They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to