Subject: Re: a Big Idea

From: "Dale M. Wheeler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:12:14 -0700

ANDREW SMITH wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Dale M. Wheeler wrote:
>
>> but if you are planning to simply key in the UBS
>> or NA apparatus, then you've got a SERIOUS copyright issue on your hands.
>> You should probably discuss this with Harold Scanlin of ABS, who is on this
>> list, to see just what the UBS and Muenster are currently thinking about
>> such things; I'd hate to see you invest HUGH amounts of time and effort
>> into something which you couldn't make available to those who would like to
>> use it.
>
>*****
>
>But couldn't he use an older edition of those text, along with its
>critical apparatus, because its copyright will have expired? Many of the
>less expensive software packages use editions and text and their related
>apparatus which are no longer copyright-protected. There's a big step up
>in prices when you purchase those CD-ROM's which have copyrighted
>material.

Sorry this response took so long...I got sidetracked BIG TIME for a while...

The answer is yes and no; NO--just because NA has a new edition, doesn't
mean that the old edition is no longer under copyright. 

YES--(you've hit on one of my pet peeves) but, it is fallacious (not to
mention misleading advertising) to claim that one has "scholarly" tools
which can be used for serious and accurate research (whether for a
dissertation or a sermon), when in fact what is being offered is a
hacked-up Strong's dictionary or other totally obsolete books. Do you
really want to do TC research with a potentially outdated and incorrect
database? As an example, there are two versions of BDB found on Bible
software, one from the Online Bible people and one from Prof Dick
Whitaker's Princeton team (derived from Whitaker's own IBYCUS version). The
former is missing numerous entries (evidently, the best I can figure,
because whoever typed it in didn't really know Hebrew all that well, and
left out every entry which just happened to have a duplicate [and normally
errroneous] Strong's number), however Whitaker's version has everything in
it. BTW, to make matters "worse", in revising the Westminster MorphHeb
database, I've already had to add over 1000 NEW numbers to the current
Strongs 8674, and there are probably a couple hundred more to
come...because we are standardizing the MorphHeb to the latest English
translation of Koehler-Baumgartner-Stamm; do you really want to use the OLB
BDB to work with the next version of the MorphHeb ??

I think its wonderful that people sacrificially e-text these tools, but the
original language ones (except for Maurice's texts) have suffered seriously
from a naive hand. But even though Maurice's texts are well done by someone
who knew what he was doing, do you want to do TC with the TR as your sole
basis ??

And while we might disagree on the pricing structure of certain e-text
versions of tools, I think the basic principle that "a workman is worthy of
his wages" applies to these enterprises as well...though I must admit I'm
frustrated by the situations I all to often see of the software producers
making tremendous amounts of money from texts they did not create, while
the folks who did create the texts get little benefit to allow them to
continue the work...but that sermon will have to wait for another day...  (-:

XAIREIN...

***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Research Professor in Biblical Languages        Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street                               Portland, OR  97220
Voice: 503-251-6416    FAX:503-254-1268     E-Mail: [email-masked] 
***********************************************************************