Wikisource:Copyright discussions/Archives/2007-11

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in November 2007, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.



The following discussion is closed: Kept. Tarmstro99 17:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Categories, by Author:Aristotle, and translated by "E M Edghill" and published in The Works of Aristotle, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1928. This etext appears all over the internet, including sites that are usually quite good with regards to copyright, such as Project Gutenberg and

However, I havent been able to find very much about the translator, or any reason why it is PD. The book, or one very similar is on Google Books[1] and it says that she was a "ex-associate of w:Newnham College, Cambridge" - see Image:Edghill-newnham.png.

Using the snippet view of Google Books, which means some very important context could be missing, The Journal of Education v.53 (Jan 1921) says:

... Bristol, have appointed Miss EM Edghill to be head mistress in succession to

Miss Shekleton, who is resigning for reasons of health. Miss Edghill was a scholar of Newnham College, Cambridge. She was placed in Class I in both parts of the Cambridge Classical Tripos. She is also an M.A., with distinction, of London, and has been head mistress of the King's High School, Warwick, for the past seven years.

There is one other mention of EM EDGEHILL being a Miss, and having come from Newnham.[2]

Also there is regular mention of a person by that name as the head mistress of

1908 - Edghill, Miss EM, Head Mistress, St. Felix School, Southwold, Suffolk

This says

...Greek contributes, to my mind, to a happier world, and I do admire St. Felix for going out for it. And Ella Edghill, the School's Previous Head Mistriss, must have smiled happily in her retirement when it did so.)

I suspect that her name is ELLA MARY Edghill, mentioned here. John Vandenberg 13:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's my guess. The 1928 Oxford Works of Aristotle under the editorship of William D. Ross who led numerous translators including E. M. Edghill was never renewed in the United States. But since an version publishing selected books the year before (1927) by Charles Scribner's Sons was renewed, some, but not all, of the translated books remain in the public domain. 07:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
At the Internet Archive (, there are copies of about 8 of the various volumes. The categories and interpretations volume containing Miss Edghill's translations can be found here. There is no copyright notice on the volume, but a mention of a copyright fund that presumably financed the translation project.
I am growing doubtful that any of those translations are copyrighted. The Aristotle Selections copyright probably has to do with the editorial selection of works, rather than the translations.
But thanks, John for that interesting info. I never would have guessed that E. M. Edghill was a woman. 08:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Was the "Works of Aristotle" ever published in the US prior to 1964? I've found a 1926 UK edition OCLC:40103235all editions. I hadnt thought of looking for a renewal, but you are right there is one Renewal R151097, which just adds to the confusion as it was published after the '26 edition, making it the first US publication of a work initially published in the UK (but not within 30 days), so it may meet all the requirements for the URAA comes into play then (which would make its copyright last even longer).
I've also found other possible Edghill publications: OCLC:13347417all editions, OCLC:36803415all editions, OCLC:50238329all editions. John Vandenberg 08:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
The Internet Archive says The Works of Aristotle was published from 1910 to 1931. From reading volume 3, you find that that volume was the last published. The various 12 volumes were presumably published one by one out of order between 1910 and 1931. I don't know how that applies to URAA (I plead ignorance) but maybe that explains why volume 2 (which includes Physics) is missing (published nearly simultaneously with the American Selections as first American publication?). 08:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
By URAA, I am referring to Title V of the URAA; see also WS:FORM. Could you provide a link to the volume you are referring to. John Vandenberg 09:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Here is the link: The Works of Aristotle, Vol. 1 07:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, the mystery of EM Edghill has been solved: OCLC:179943961all editions. 'Tis a pity we still dont know when she died, but it will be much easier now we have her full name.

"New Publications" Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. Volume 32, Number 6 (1926), 727-730 - mentions it being pubslihed in 1926 as well:

Aristotle. The works of Aristotle translated into English under the editorship of W. D. Ross. Categoriae and De interpretatione, by E. M. Edghill; Analytica priora, by A. J. Jenkinson; Analytica posteriora, by G. R. G. Mure. Oxford, Claredon Press 1926. 348 pp.

Ethics (Aristotle) may also be on shaky territory, as it says it is published in 1923. John Vandenberg 11:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Not likely; Jowett died in 1893. Eclecticology 02:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
When I read WS:FORM I see the URAA rules restore copyrights. However the volume we looked at doesn't seem to have had a copyright to begin with. Do you think the URAA rules still apply in the two cases you mentioned, or am I missing something? 18:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
A Census search here gave only one Ella Edghill possibly born in 1882 in Hampshire, living in London in 1891 and in Bedfordshire in 1901. Whatever Ross renewed could only apply to his editing and compilation; he could not have renewed any of Edghill's copyrights on her behalf. The whole purpose of renewals in the US was to give authors who had a bad deal from publishers the first time around a second kick at the cat. The other thing which is far from clear is the treatment of translations and derivative works in England. The idea of a whole new copyright for a derivative work may be uniquely a US idea. The last time I llooked at the UK act I didn't find anything to cover the matter. If Edghill never had a copyright in her translation there may be nothing to restore.
Regarding the snippet view of the 1921 Journal of Education this may very well be available in full from US searchers. I remember reading somewhere (perhaps from Peter Suber's site) that when we underprivileged foreigners can't see this stiff directly, it can sometimes be done with a US proxy. The other point that might make this safe is that PG tends to be very conservative about this sort of thing. Eclecticology 02:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
The permissions page to Aristotle Selections published by Charles Scribner's in 1927 was available free at Questia. It states:
The translation used in the following selections is the Oxford Translation of Aristotle, except in the case of the few works for which that translation is not yet available. The editor and the publishers wish to express their thanks to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press and to the Trustees of the Jowett Copyright Fund for per­mission to use the Oxford Translation.
Printed in the United States of America
There are about 100 short selections in the work, and as referenced above, all the volumes except perhaps volume 2 in the Oxford original are free of copyright (the Jowett Copyright Fund presumably consisted of funds obtained from an earlier copyrighted edition of Aristotle's works). So the Charles Scribner's copyright apparently refers to the 100 or so selection choices designed to well represent Aristotle's work, rather than the translated text for which they respectfully obtained permission, it having been recently published.
As I just said, volume 2 of W. D. Ross's Oxford edition is excluded for some reason from That volume contains the following:
Physics (Physica), translated by R. P. Hardie and R. K. Gaye
On the Heavens (De caelo), translated by J. L. Stocks
On Generation and Corruption (De generatione et corruptione), translated by H. H. Joachim
I suggest we direct our successive efforts on this remaining volume, the only one with works where the copyright status is unclear. 06:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I found a copy at the library, it's got no copyright either.
There were later editions of some or all of the works also, of undetermined copyright status, so it would be good to be mindful of that if someone contributes more Aristotle. 04:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Kept Categories, the subject of the original nomination. The task of resolving copyright status for the other individual translations in Volume 2 of the Ross collection can await whomever decides to contribute those works here. Tarmstro99 17:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Kept in part/Deleted in part[edit]

Author:W. H. Auden[edit]

The following discussion is closed: Kept In praise of limestone; deleted Funeral Blues. Tarmstro99 17:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

There is a possible copyright violation for In praise of limestone. In the wikipedia w:W. H. Auden article, "In Praise of Limestone" is mentioned as being from the work, Nones, which has a renewal record (RE027771), being copyrighted in 1951. 01:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

According to [3],
'In Praise of Limestone' was first published in Horizon in July 1948 and then appeared in Nones (1951). Auden revised the poem for W. H. Auden: A selection by the Author (1958) and printed the revised version in Collected Shorter Poems, 1927-1959 (1966) and Selected Poems (1968).
It was first published in Horizon Vol. 18, no. 103; see OCLC:30843081all editions and OCLC:1752266all editions. Provided we have the original poem as published in Horizon, we should be fine. John Vandenberg 01:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you're fast! There's a second one, Funeral Blues mentioned in the same article as being from the book Another Time, which has a renewal record (R415283), copyrighted 1940. The same resource John Vandenberg used (Googlebooks) showed that the copyright for the poem was listed as being copyrighted that year too, and renewed in 1968. Now I only hope when I save the page, I don't get an edit conflict from John through him having anticipated my next move! 02:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

It is relatively safe to ignore the Another Time book; almost everything found in it will have been published earlier. It's appalling that lists that book as the basis for copyright of the poems they provide for Auden. But in this case I think you have found a problem. Funeral Blues was originally called The F6 Blues as part of the The Ascent of F6 (1934); renewed in 1964 Renewal R334379. Sorry for the delay :-) John Vandenberg 08:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Here [4] is the link from Google Books. In a book called something like The 100 best poems, it acknowledges the copyright of "Funeral Blues" to be the same year as Another Time along with the renewal date I mentioned. The reason I bring this up is that there is a wikipedia page, w:Funeral Blues which explains the poem in The Ascent of F6 is an early and different version of "Funeral Blues". 16:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks like Funeral Blues needs to be deleted, any objections?--BirgitteSB 15:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Please give me another day to revisit this one. John Vandenberg 17:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • To recap, the five stanza version (which we dont have) is copyright as part of The Ascent of F6 (1934); renewed in 1964 Renewal R334379. The four stanza version did appear in Another Time (1940); renewed in 1967 Renewal R415283.
    However, the four stanza version may have first appeared as Song IX in "Twelve Songs"[5], (printed in England?), but I cant find an OCLC for it. The song appears to have had a note under it of "April 1936". OCLC:163872069all editions and OCLC:163872063all editions give me reason to believe it was performed before Another Time. Anyway, I'm happy to let this one go... John Vandenberg 19:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Deleted. Tarmstro99 17:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


Do Not Go Gentle into that Good Night[edit]

The following discussion is closed: Moved and deleted. Yann 00:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

the source, as listed on the talk page, has a copyright notice, so this is pretty clear copyvio --Samael775 00:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

He died in 1951 (Scottish), so no PD that route. Are we certain it was registered (first published in Botteghe Oscure?) if it was necessary at the time? Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:William Gordon Stables 01:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Antonio Villaraigosa[edit]

The following discussion is closed: deleted with no contest--Jusjih 02:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

His press release in 2006 as the mayor of Los Angeles, California, USA probably does not qualify for Template:PD-EdictGov. Please comment.--Jusjih 03:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what a "public ordinance" is, but it's certainly not fitting any of the other examples. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:William Gordon Stables 03:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I have notified the contributor at w:User talk:Rockero#Wikisource_document. John Vandenberg 05:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Pedagogy of the Oppressed and Pedagogy of the Oppressed/Chapter I[edit]

The following discussion is closed: deleted. John Vandenberg 03:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Published in English in 1970, according to w:Pedagogy of the Oppressed. This version from Google Books includes a current copyright notice. Tarmstro99 15:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The author, w:Paulo Freire is Brazilian, and according to w:List of countries' copyright length, they have 70pma. This document from the US State department says "Brazil's copyright law generally conforms to world-class standards," so since nobody has objected, I've deleted this and will emailed the user to let them know. John Vandenberg 03:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

France gets a new street, Sesame Street, that is[edit]

The following discussion is closed: deleted, no objection. Tarmstro99 15:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This appears to be a press release. I cant see it on [6] but there are parts of it here. John Vandenberg 01:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. The linked page includes an express copyright notice. (If this document really originated as a mere blog post, it may also fall outside the scope of WS:WWI, but the copyright violation is enough for me.) Tarmstro99 19:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The Trap episode 2[edit]

The following discussion is closed: deleted, no objection. Tarmstro99 15:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I remember back in the good old days when we had to delete Episode I! Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Pulitzer-winning writings 22:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


Metaphysics (again)[edit]

The following discussion is closed: withdrawn

This was closed as keep in Wikisource:Possible copyright violations/Archives/2006/06#Metaphysics (June 2006) an Ross definitely translated the work in 1908, however I doesnt appear obvious that we have confirmed that we are only distributing the 1908 edition, and the online resource that was used to populate Wikisource [7] makes no mention of the edition used. This OCLC:369755all editions appears to be the series we need to track down. In the Oxford libraries, the 1908 work is:

Author:    Aristotle. 
Uniform Title: Metaphysics. English 
Title:  Metaphysica / Aristotle ; [translated] by W.D. Ross.
Publisher:      Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1908.
Description:    xv, 981a-1093a, [xi] p. ; 22 cm.
Series:         Aristotle. Works. English. 1908 
Untraced Series:        The works of Aristotle translated into English
Notes:  Pages numbered a and b for main text.
               Includes bibliographical footnotes and index.
Subjects:       Metaphysics -- Early works to 1800 
Other Names:    Ross, W. D. (William David), 1877-1971 
Local Control Number:   15511184

There is an alternative translation, by Hugh Tredennick, 1933; no renewal that I could see. John Vandenberg 15:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Due to the lack of comment and the very low risk that the work hosted by MIT is copyright, I have noted the above on the talk page, and withdraw this request to have the decision reviewed again. John Vandenberg 12:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)