Thu Aug 22 21:15:43 1996

From owner-tc-list  Thu Aug 22 21:15:43 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id VAA04238; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 21:14:25 -0400
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 21:10:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Collation and Reproduction
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 3188


On Thu, 22 Aug 1996, Timothy John Finney wrote:

> 2) Schofield's edition of the papyri (those known up to 1936);

I have a complete copy of Schofield's 1936 dissertation, and the
transcriptions would be easy enough to reproduce electronically.  Now if I
could only find something called "spare time"....*;-) 

> There are all kinds of barriers standing before the Project, especially
> with regard to obtaining images. A recurring issue is that ofIntellectual
> Property Rights. Is a conversion to machine readable form an infringement
> of copyright? Which editions could we convert without fear of litigation?

Obviously any edition which was produced in printed form over 75 years ago
(pre-1921) is now in the public domain and may be freely used by anyone. 

Independent collations from current published photographic or printed
editions (e.g. the Bodmer plates) are of course entirely permissible,
since they are merely the recording of factual data taken from such
facsimiles or reproductions.  

Should one choose to utilize such a collation to reproduce in full form
that collation as a continuous text, no infringement would occur (though
errors from any poor collation procedures might exist).  

Only if you were intending to reproduce photographic plates from currently
copyrighted published works would there be any possible problems, and then
more likely with the holding institution which may have given permission
to the publisher or author of the copyrighted book.  Of course, if the
photographic plates were published over 75 years ago, they are totally
within the public domain, and free for reproduction, regardless of the
library or monastery holding them.

If dealing with _unpublished_ photographs or microfilms, one of course is
subject to whatever restrictions the holding institution (e.g. Muenster)
might impose in granting access to them, though I would hope that in most
cases there would be no restrictions whatever on making collations and
freely distributing collation data; anyone then could reconstruct a
continuous text from such collations with no infringment.  Anything less
than free and unhindered access by major holding institutions would
reflect a practice almost as scandalous as the current Dead Sea Scrolls
situation, being a hindrance to free inquiry and the scholarly endeavor.
(I seriously question whether a "real" copyright can or should exist on
any ancient MS data in the first place, since under all copyright laws,
the "original" publication was hundreds of years ago, and such should by
all rights now be in the public domain).

I would mention that the microfilms of all the MSS at Mt.Sinai, Mt.Athos,
and Jerusalem which were made by the Kenneth W. Clark expedition in the
late 1940s were deposited in the US Library of Congress, and have been
from the beginning totally available for any scholarly purposes and/or
publication. 

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Assoc. Prof./Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back