I think what happens is that if the publisher ceases to exist the copyright reverts to the author. My limited Googling didn't provide a clue one way or the other if Hayden survived, but Bill Maddox came up with a link that shows Hayden was acquired (at some point) by Macmillian Publishing: http://www.creativepro.com/company/contact/40.html What would be the right approach to Macmillian? Rich Rich Cini Collector of classic computers Lead engineer, Altair32 Emulator Web site: http://highgate.comm.sfu.ca/~rcini/classiccmp/ Web site: http://www.altair32.com/ /***************************************************/ -----Original Message----- From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Grant Stockly Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:41 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: Book publishers At 04:29 PM 1/30/2007, you wrote: 1986." This is the book and the search records that came up at the copyright office: The search turns up: 1. Registration Number: TX-450-663 Title: The S-100 bus handbook / Dave Bursky. Imprint: Rochelle Park, N. J. : Hayden Book Co., c1980. Description: 257 p.ISBN: ISBN 0-8104-0897-X. Claimant: Hayden Book Company, Inc. Created: 1979 Published: 21Mar80 Registered: 11Apr80 Special Codes: 1/B///A Grant

Fred Cisin wrote: Post it on line ... If a lawyer shows up, ask what company he works for. :) Still a copy book may show up for sale.

On 30 Jan 2007 at 21:53, Evan Koblentz wrote: Well, good luck with that. I've had my fill of experience with the music publishers--you find an old piece, say, from 1932 and you want to get a legal copy. So you write the publisher and get the response that "sorry, it's out of print--and you may not copy an existing copy". Okay, you ask them if they can sell you a reprint--the response can vary from "no, we don't do reprints" to "yes, we do reprints, and our fee is $150 per page for a barely-readable photocopy" Don't be surprised of Macmillian gives you flat-out "no". Such is the state of affairs as regards copyright. I keep telling myself that surely, this can't be what was intended by the founding fathers. Consider that our national anthem was a bald-faced ripoff of an English drinking society song. But then, that was then and this is now. Cheers, Chuck

At 09:12 PM 1/30/2007, you wrote: Sometimes asking as a hobbiest can help. I did this once with a company that produces a commedy TV show. I e-mailed the president of the company and told him I wanted to put some segments on a DVD. He FedExed me a Digital Betacam dub of the masters of the show. Of course, I've also tried to deal with music labels. I keep the Digital betacam tape next to me to remind me that there are still humans in the world (unlike ALL of labeled music). I only use independent music in my DVDs. : ) Grant

Hey, "Collectors," I had no idea that calling someone a "collector" was insulting. Live and learn. At any rate, although the topic may be done and dusted, I actually know something about copyright law, having been forced to deal with it in several respects for many years. Before I start, let me state I am not a lawyer, barrister, solicitor, or any creature of that ilk, so, take my words as advice from one person to another. Check with a legal professional before taking any action which might place you afoul of the legal system, or copyright owners. That is a disclaimer. Now, some random comments, in post-reverse order... On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 21:35 -0800, Chuck Guzis wrote: First, there is no doubt whatsoever that "The Star-Spangled Banner" was new words over a drinking song written in, ironically enough, 1776. Read about it here: http://www.colonialmusic.org/Resource/Anacreon.htm . On the other hand, that was the normal practice of the time, and "ripoff" doesn't really apply. The Statute of Anne, 1710, is generally given as the first real copyright law, although several similar laws and royal edicts had been put in place previously. In essence, copyright law gives authors exclusive rights to their works for a fixed period of time, and makes it easy for them to enforce those rights, and obtain damages from those who take their intellectual property. In exchange, after a period of time (originally 14 years) with a possible renewal (originally also 14 years) the work would pass into the public domain, meaning that it was owned equally by everyone, and anyone could use it in any way they wished, as if it were their own creation. The idea was that EVERYTHING would be in the public domain, eventually, and authors would have a period of time in which to reap the benefits of their efforts. On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 21:09 -0500, Richard A. Cini wrote: Ack! This is not true, and can land someone in court. Copyright survives the death of the author, or the dissolution of any entity which acquired copyright. Of course, it is possible to sell the copyright with a proviso that the rights revert to the author upon the demise of the person or entity purchasing them. When I wrote software for clients who did not wish to purchase source code, I always included a clause which allowed the client to arrange, and pay for, escrow storage, into which I would place the source code. Upon my demise, or a year of my refusal to maintain the software, the client could collect it, and get someone else to work on it. So, one CAN put all sorts of odd clauses in sales contracts, but they are not necessary. Failing such sleight-of-hand, a sale of copyright is fee simple -- money goes one way, all rights go the other, and the buyer no longer has the use of his money, and the seller no longer has the use of his work. On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 18:01 -0800, Fred Cisin wrote: Yes, that is quite accurate and succinct. However, I did get the same information across, and was more verbose, to boot. <Grin> A little thought shows why that would be... Infringing authors would search for the copyright owners with all the diligence of O.J. Simpson searching for the "real killers." Peace, Warren E. Wolfe wizard at voyager.net

If you can locate the author, you might want to approach him first. It may be the case that the copyright has in fact reverted to him. If not, he might be sufficiently interested keeping the book "alive" to attempt to reclaim the rights of several cases in which copyrights for out-of-print books were returned to the author at his request. I would imagine that a publisher would be more inclined to do a favor for an author than a random hobbyist. --Bill

On 30 Jan 2007 at 16:29, Grant Stockly wrote: You'd have to go back a long way before the issue of "Copyright Renewal" had a bearing on this. Basically, anything having an in- force copyright in 1978 had the term extended to 75, then to 90 years automatically. That means that the only PD material we currently have (unless said material passed into the PD prior to 1978) was copyrighted prior to 1923. It's rare for property belonging to a defunct company to go unclaimed. Usually, someone purchases the intangibles as part of bankruptcy. Said intangibles often wind up in a box in a closet, but they exist nonetheless. But no, copyright as a rule does not revert to the author, unless this is so stated in the original contract wherein the author assigns ownership of the copyright to the publisher. Yes, it can be maddening to find out who owns what; the law is no help. If you publish something and the daughter of the guy with the box in the closet recognizes that you've published her material without permission, you're in trouble. Contrary to legend, there is no such concept in law as "abandonware". The Copyright Office has issued an opinion about archival preservation of old programs on obsolete hardware. Unfortunately, this doesn't cover much of what I see plastered around as abandonware, said material often would run just fine on a Windows XP command prompt, or, at worst, on DR-DOS or ConcurrentDOS or a number of other systems. The last I heard, the platform (x86) isn't obsolete yet. Cheers, Chuck

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 10:11:53 -0700, Kevin Handy wrote: ... For you stamp collectors out there :) Here is a recent example of the Disney characters being used along with an image of the worlds oldest astronomical computer to shamelessly promote the sale of a collector stamp. http://tinyurl.com/2vtlwt In a last virtual attempt to drift back on topic :) I know a postcard Dealor who has saved computer electronics related postcard packs for years. He would like to know if there are any other Ad card collectors ? Contact me off list. later ... back under my rock :) Bob Bradlee