Drotte-Roche mixup

David Stockhoff · 20 Apr 2011, 23:03 · from 2011-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: dstockhoff at verizon.net (David Stockhoff)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:03:15 -0400
Subject: (urth) Drotte-Roche mixup
In-Reply-To: <4DAEFFF5.1000903 at io.com>
References: <128871.1485.qm at web84106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<4DAEFFF5.1000903 at io.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF6633.4070403 at verizon.net>

Right, the LoC doesn't care if you fix typos. But you do need to buy a 
new ISBN and  apply for CIP info for any new edition. Which can get 
burdensome when you own thousands of titles ... but I think it's all 
basically art vs commerce at this point. They'd fix Harry Potter if 
Rowling asked for it. Wolfe is an award-winner, not a money-maker.

On 4/20/2011 11:47 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:
> On 4/19/2011 11:34 AM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:
>> I've never really understood this problem. When you do a new edition, 
>> you change what feel you need to change, and that ought to include 
>> obvious errors. The copyright owner and publisher decide together, of 
>> course.
>>
>> It's not the technology. You make the changes, repaginate according 
>> to the format (size and length) of the new edition, slap a new cover 
>> on it, and print. This has been done at least semi-electronically for 
>> decades with increasing ease and still the typos remain, so it can't 
>> be blamed entirely on the fact that each new typesetting introduced 
>> new errors. It might depend on the file format of the "master" files, 
>> though, and who knows what that means for the Sun books.
>
> While this sort of thing is possible, chatter in the spec-fic forums 
> leads me to think it's often skipped or done with minimal amounts of 
> underinformed entry-level labor, as it can't be shown that any money 
> spent on fiddling typo corrections will sell more books.
>
>> Certainly a living author has to agree to these corrections (and it's 
>> difficult to convince a dead author), but this is something you see 
>> so often I can't believe Wolfe is very special in this regard. Maybe 
>> it's the agents who are to blame, or the lawyers. The Library of 
>> Congress doesn't care as long as you submit your paperwork (which is 
>> now done online).
>
> I'm not sure where the LC comes into it; since 1978, copyright vests 
> upon creation in a tangible form, and few typos aren't going to affect 
> what is a derivative work or not.
>


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 110420-1, 04/20/2011
Tested on: 4/20/2011 7:03:16 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
http://www.avast.com

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net