Bob Pritchett:copyright protects original creative expression, not transcription, database compilation, digitization, etc.
From the British Library website: http://www.bl.uk/reshelp/bldept/manuscr/copyright/index.html
"If the published work is a straightforward facsimile edition using photographic techniques then the photographs from which it is made are protected until the year of the photographer's death plus 70 years. If the photographer is anonymous then protection is until the year of publication plus 70 years. If the work is simply a transcription of an original manuscript then the typography is protected for 25 years from year of publication. If a work is a re-issue of an old edition with a new introduction then the introduction is in copyright in the usual way (author's death plus 70 years) but the re-issued text does not attract a new copyright."
It may be that the cases I am familiar with (all related to West Gallery music) fall into the "manuscript" rather than "re-issue" provision.
Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."
I wasn't talking about base-packages, so yes Logos could offer a lot more different packages.
Robert Wazlavek:You cannot expect Logos to offer 100 different base packages so as to cater to every single individual. And again, you can't say "a lot of encyclopedias" because that means something different to everyone. You apparently think two encyclopedias is a lot. Therefore, your whole argument falls apart.
Robert Wazlavek:No one here is interested in your self-glorifying boasting of your personal knowledge. So you should probably calm down and stop being so argumentative before you say more.
fgh:I did? Unix:I doubt the NRSV reverse interlinear Apocrypha has 4 Esdras Unix:I 've decided that I take the Original Languages -base-package. It includes English-Greek Reverse Interlinear of the NRSV Apocryphal Texts, but I doubt that it contains 4 Esdras!
Unix:I doubt the NRSV reverse interlinear Apocrypha has 4 Esdras
Unix:I 've decided that I take the Original Languages -base-package. It includes English-Greek Reverse Interlinear of the NRSV Apocryphal Texts, but I doubt that it contains 4 Esdras!
Disclosure!trulyergonomic.com 48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11
MJ. Smith: Bob Pritchett:copyright protects original creative expression, not transcription, database compilation, digitization, etc. From the British Library website: http://www.bl.uk/reshelp/bldept/manuscr/copyright/index.html "If the published work is a straightforward facsimile edition using photographic techniques then the photographs from which it is made are protected until the year of the photographer's death plus 70 years. If the photographer is anonymous then protection is until the year of publication plus 70 years. If the work is simply a transcription of an original manuscript then the typography is protected for 25 years from year of publication. If a work is a re-issue of an old edition with a new introduction then the introduction is in copyright in the usual way (author's death plus 70 years) but the re-issued text does not attract a new copyright." It may be that the cases I am familiar with (all related to West Gallery music) fall into the "manuscript" rather than "re-issue" provision.
First, this is British copyright law, which differs from American copyright law.
Second, typography means something different than the set of words electronically represented. It means the style and appearance of the printed matter – the typeface, kerning, formatting on the page, and the like. If you give me an electronic edition of your transcription, I can make my own, similarly "copyrighted", transcription by selecting the entire thing, hitting "Command+C", and using a "Paste Text Only" command to strip the formatting. So I think (although I am less certain) that even under British law, Logos would be OK to use someone else's transcription.
Unix: I wasn't talking about base-packages, so yes Logos could offer a lot more different packages.
You're not making any sense. You're talking about packages, the only packages Logos offers are base packages. They offer bundles, and deals, etc. But their packages are base packages. So you can't differentiate between the two unless you're suggesting they implement some other package something or other besides the base packages. So again, you aren't making any sense. Of course they could offer more base packages, but that is pointless. The base package is just a starting point. You can buy individual stuff when you want it. It doesn't make any sense for them to offer 20 different base packages. 9 is plenty. They could offer more if they wanted. But why? To cater to every individual so that all everyone has to do is buy a base package and never need to buy individual resources? There just isn't a real logical reason for Logos to offer a ton of different base packages.
Many forum users seem to be boasting about a number of things. I'm not boasting, I've told how low education level I have + I was an atheist for some of those 8½ years.
That doesn't mean you should too. And you didn't mention any of that in your post anyway, though it's not like it matters. All you did was mention how you know your English versions to bolster your argument, but fgh proved by quoting your posts that your argument was bad. And you aren't helping yourself by continuing to argue.
Bob Pritchett: Yes, we read this. But I think you're all doing a good job of making my points for me. :-) The more expensive and valuable a resource, the more expensive it is for us to include a base package. So things like AYBD are unlikely to be added to base collections, because the publisher can get (and wants) a premium price for premium content. FSB in particular is designed to be self-contained at "Level 1". If you click the plus signs, you get let level two notes -- also included, as is the Lexham Bible Dictionary and detailed sidebars. When you've expanded Level 2 you also get links to "Level 3" external content, which is not included. Saying it should be included, or available cheap, is a Catch-22: we reference it as the next place to go after included notes because it's great, premium content. But that's why we can't include it -- because great premium content isn't cheap. We could include everything referenced, but then we'd have to stop referencing most of the good stuff. :-) -- Bob
Yes, we read this. But I think you're all doing a good job of making my points for me. :-)
The more expensive and valuable a resource, the more expensive it is for us to include a base package. So things like AYBD are unlikely to be added to base collections, because the publisher can get (and wants) a premium price for premium content.
FSB in particular is designed to be self-contained at "Level 1". If you click the plus signs, you get let level two notes -- also included, as is the Lexham Bible Dictionary and detailed sidebars. When you've expanded Level 2 you also get links to "Level 3" external content, which is not included. Saying it should be included, or available cheap, is a Catch-22: we reference it as the next place to go after included notes because it's great, premium content. But that's why we can't include it -- because great premium content isn't cheap. We could include everything referenced, but then we'd have to stop referencing most of the good stuff. :-)
-- Bob
I gotcha. I suppose that does make sense. It's just unfortunate from the consumer side. I don't want to pay premium prices! Lol.
OK, thank's or pointing out the proper use of the terms. What I was suggesting, was adjustments to and more of different so called libraries and other bundles. I haven't been suggesting more base-packages.
Robert Wazlavek:They offer bundles, and deals, etc. But their packages are base packages. So you can't differentiate between the two unless you're suggesting they implement some other package something or other besides the base packages.
Robert Wazlavek: but fgh proved by quoting your posts that your argument was bad. And you aren't helping yourself by continuing to argue.
mitchellisdumb:Second, typography means something different than the set of words electronically represented.
I'm not a lawyer or librarian. I was only trying to share quotations from reliable sources which corresponded to actual experience of a couple of acquaintances.
Unix: I write that the Logos NRSV reverse interlinear doesn't have 4 Esdras
Perhaps because it is still under development? http://www.logos.com/product/7130/english-greek-reverse-interlinear-of-the-nrsv-apocryphal-texts There is no reason to think Logos is not including all the apocrypha as defined by the NRSV. I don't quite understand your concern. Could you explain why you think it won't include 4 Esdras? Thanks.
MJ. Smith: mitchellisdumb:Second, typography means something different than the set of words electronically represented. I'm not a lawyer or librarian. I was only trying to share quotations from reliable sources which corresponded to actual experience of a couple of acquaintances.
I just reread my post, and it came off quite harshly. Please accept my apologies. I'm neither a lawyer nor a librarian myself. I tend to get a bit worked up over fair use and public domain, I fear it's been chipped away at to the point where we're in danger of losing it. I do appreciate your contribution to the discussion, and whether it applies to transcription or not you bring up an interesting and relevant point – while American copyright law doesn't allow a copyright on formatting, British law does.
mitchellisdumb:Please accept my apologies.
Done. I've been known to get worked up over certain issues myself.
Rick Brannan used to work for Logos. Here's a post he wrote: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/48471/360300.aspx#360300Only a few verses of 4 Esdras have survived Gk. The rest is in Latin. But it's very difficult to find these few verses, so I'm going to suggest to Logos that they include these Gk verses in the English Greek reverse interlinear of the NRSV apocryphal texts.
MJ. Smith:There is no reason to think Logos is not including all the apocrypha as defined by the NRSV. I don't quite understand your concern. Could you explain why you think it won't include 4 Esdras? Thanks.
Good memory. You're correct Unix
MJ. Smith: tom collinge:Bob has said that he was not rewriting L5. And to think I interpreted Bob's statement in the reverse way: I expected to see WPF out but the user interface/processing logic to be the same. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Bob really meant.
tom collinge:Bob has said that he was not rewriting L5.
And to think I interpreted Bob's statement in the reverse way: I expected to see WPF out but the user interface/processing logic to be the same. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Bob really meant.
Hmmm... WPF being out in V5 would be a mixed blessing.
Oh well, beggars can't be choosers.
---
James W Bennett
http://syriac.tara-lu.com/
James W Bennett:Hmmm... WPF being out in V5 would be a mixed blessing.
tom collinge:We can only hope and pray that WPF will not be part of L5. I have a funny feeling that we are stuck with WPF until L6. I hope that I am wrong.
I hope that you are wrong also. L4 is a great software. I want everything that will slow it down to be ditched.
Lynden Williams Communications
Just talked to a sales rep this morning about this specific question (wondering why I didn't have Zechariah in the NAC). The rep said I could purchase it for $30, or if I could wait until L5 comes out, it should be available with the upgrade.
The Logos 5 collections have not been defined, so the rep cannot know whether new NAC volumes will (or even should) be included in the upgrade or not. (I will be following up with the sales department to make sure we're not inadvertently disseminating incorrect information.)
I'm worried that the salaries paid to the reviewers mentioned in: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/51401.aspx... will make e-books more expensive or stay the same price, (when it should be the other way, that prices on some items would go down).I allready use Christianforums to discuss theology and just read.Faithlife has very few Bible versions.So I have a number of reasons why I'm not going to use Faithlife.It's strange that Logos is developing these other things before they have a complete Bible with all Apocryphal OT books in English and in the original languages, with BOTH Gk and Hebrew in the OT.There are very few English Bibles that have all or most of the Apocryphal OT books, one of them is the 1989 REB. I'm suspecting that Logos is working on releasing the REB (perhaps the negotiations with the publisher are hard - I'm guessing) - but it's taking a very long time. Logos should start prioritizing this!It would be good if Logos would provide much more clear information on Copyright restrictions, either as summaries, or for each individual title, that You could see in the software. Then You could also paste that info together with the quote, whenever You suspect that people who read what You've written are not familiar with those rules.
Bradley Grainger (Logos): The Logos 5 collections have not been defined, so the rep cannot know whether new NAC volumes will (or even should) be included in the upgrade or not. (I will be following up with the sales department to make sure we're not inadvertently disseminating incorrect information.)
How about getting rid of NAC all together and giving us NICOT/NICNT instead? If that's not possible then include NIVAC both OT and NT and that should make up for the lost of the NAC lol
Dreaming!
DAL
Unix:I'm worried that the salaries paid to the reviewers mentioned
No need to worry - it is highly unlikely that they are on salary with the exception of managing editors.