Forum: Author Hangout

I would say, without the author's permission you can't edit and post his story.

You say 'NO' to two different things in one statement.

I do the first (edit) for years now and it's why I went from printed books to eBooks. I hate rereading a book after some years and finding the same stupid errors again.
If I like a book/story and consider it worth reading a second (or third, fourth, ...) time, I edit the typos and errors (like wrong names) and wrong homophones. Sometimes I inform the author about the errors I've found, but not always. When reading the story/book the second time I transform it into an eBook and sometimes even change the layout.
I did this especially with Ernest Bywater's books, where I removed the SOL-Chapter headings and changed the layout to EB's original layout of chapter (red), subchapter (blue) and section (black) headings as listed in the ToC.

But I do this for me in my copy. It's the same as when I scribble in my printed books.

I would never post the edited story/book somewhere or distribute it to others.
So yes, you can't post the story – changed or unchanged – without the author's permission!

BTW, I haven't – yet – really changed a story by deleting paragraphs, rewriting parts or adding new content.
I've however started reading a few stories where I found the story idea interesting, but the way he wrote it let me thinking 'Even I can do this better!'. I never tried to rewrite the story, I just stopped reading it. I always decided to improve a bad written story to a mediocre one isn't worth the effort.

HM.

No, no, the story was posted as "Original Title" and I would be posting "Original Title - Redux" (not actually "Original Title" of course, that would be very silly).

I had less-than/grater-than symbols surrounding "Original Title" in both my original post and subject line, that SOL's message board ate as being malformed HTML tags.

If the author is known to be dead, then their works should go into the public domain.

Unless an author explicitly donates a work to the public domain, when and how it falls into public domain is entirely an issue of copyright law, and the law doesn't work like that.

That said, if an author is dead, with no known heirs, the risk of a lawsuit is very low.

1. SOL itself would face legal risk if one author continues another author's work and posts that continuation to SOL. It is Lazeez's decision if he is willing to take that risk in a particular case.

2. I would support changes to to copyright law:

2.1 Personally, I think copyright terms under current law (including the Bern Convention) are too long. I would support changes to shorten copyright terms.

2.2 So that in cases where an author dies and no heir to inherit the copyright can be identified a work falls into the public domain much sooner.

Personally, I think copyright terms under current law (including the Bern Convention) are too long. I would support changes to shorten copyright terms.

I especially can't understand why if I have an idea and work it out and get it patented, the patent doesn't run until 70 years after my death, it expires far earlier. Why this difference between material and immaterial works?
Is an invention less protection worth than a literary work?

HM.

The notion of life + copyright terms starts with the Bern Convention (1886). The Bern Convention is an international treaty on copyright.

1. The US did not become a signatory to the Bern Convention until the 1980s.
2. Prior to 1976, US copyright terms were much closer to patent terms. Copyright terms changed, not patent terms.
3. As far as I know, there is no multi-national treaty on patents that would be equivalent to the Bern Convention.

2. I would support changes to to copyright law:

2.1 Personally, I think copyright terms under current law (including the Bern Convention) are too long. I would support changes to shorten copyright terms.

2.2 So that in cases where an author dies and no heir to inherit the copyright can be identified a work falls into the public domain much sooner.

I agree as far as dead tree books are concerned. IF the book goes out of print for say 3 years (for a talking point) it should go into the public domain. That would give the publisher time to reprint. In conjunction to this, the copyright owner should have legal recourse to the publisher if they REFUSE ti reprint.

in today's world, ebooks never go out of print.

While true, they are sometimes no longer available.
One probable cause, the publisher vanishes. Until a new publisher is found and takes over distribution, the eBook is not available, possible for years.
Distributors like Amazon may ignore the fact they lost the partner holding the rights and continue to sell the eBooks.

BTW, I know one case where the German publisher Bertelsmann
published two books in the "Famous Five" series by Enid Blyton after her death.

The German "Geisterbände"
In Germany, two books came out with a questionable author.
• Fünf Freunde auf der verbotenen Insel ("Five Friends on the Forbidden Island") (1977)
• Fünf Freunde und der blaue Diamant ("Five Friends and the Blue Diamond") (1979)
Although Enid Blyton is named as author on the cover, the books were most likely written by German author Brigitte Blobel, who is credited as the translator. The books were recalled after the first edition owing to copyright issues, and are now rare and high-priced collector's items.

Brigitte Blobel was the translator of the other books in the "Five Friends" series.
If something similar happens with eBooks, they would no longer be available, they might even try to delete the books the next time your reader connects with the publisher/distributor and gets "updated".

The French publisher did it better and – after Enid Blyton's death – got the rights to publish books written by their French translator Claude Voilier, in total 24 volumes, the first 19 later translated into English.

BTW, Bertelsmann now owns 100% of Penguin Random House LLC.

HM.