[bksvol-discuss] Re: boot camp for christians
- From: Tracy Carcione <carcione@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:46:09 -0400
Gustavo, Bookshare god, makes mistakes??? Naw, that can't be right! <grin>
Tracy
At 01:38 PM 7/6/05 -0500, you wrote:
>Tracy,
>
>I don't know what happened with your book The Wild Bill Nightmare, but
>sometimes, like with Boot Camp for Christians, the copyright holder is not
>the author, and I think Gustavo just wants to have some confidence that the
>holder is correct before approving the book.
>
>In the future, if you've gone to the trouble of verifying the copyright,
>then be sure to mention that in the comments along with what you did to
>verify that copyright. That way Gustavo has some confidence in the
>copyright holder and is less likely to kick it back.
>
>I won't say he won't kick it back even if you include that information in
>the comments, because Gustavo kicked back one of mine with that information
>by mistake once because he was staying up late to approve books and was
>tired. When I inquired about the problem because there were no comments at
>all as to why he kicked it back, he told me not to worry and to just
>reupload it for him so he could reprocess it. Remember, we all make
>mistakes now and then. <Smile>
>
>Gerald
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tracy Carcione
>Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 12:56 PM
>To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: boot camp for christians
>
>
>Jake and Mike,
>All I meant was, if the book says, plain as day, copyright so-and-so, why
>isn't that good enough?
>Reference the Wild Bill nightmare, where the book says the copyright date
>and holder, copyright.gov agrees, and it still gets kicked back.
>I guess I do want to know what Gustavo is thinking, because there is
>something here I'm not getting. But I still have no desire to become a
>copyright lawyer. I just want some simple, easy-to-follow, guideline. I
>miss Jesse; he was good at those.
>
>Tracy
>At 08:40 AM 7/6/05 -0500, you wrote:
>>Hey Tracy,
>> Gustavo has kicked the book back to the validation page with requests
>>for verification of copyright four times now. This does seem to suggest
>that
>>the information needs to be verifiable somewhere else.
>> For instance, I actually validated something (surprise!) a while back
>>and had it sent back to the validation page for copyright verification. I
>>was unable to find the information on the Library of Congress website, but
>I
>>did find a sample chapter of the book on the publisher's website. That page
>>also had the same copyright information as the book and so I reuploaded the
>>book referencing the site and Gustavo approved it.
>> On the other hand, I validated a book a while back and Gustavo sent
>that
>>one back too (notice a pattern, I must be jinxed), but I never did find the
>>necessary info and so I allowed the book to make it's way back to step one.
>>Quite a shame too, the scan was excellent, but I had read it and made a few
>>corrections.
>>
>> Since we generally scan books and we know the problems OCR can have, it
>>might be a BookShare policy to have a second place to make sure copyright
>>info is correct. I for one am glad that BookShare is actively attempting to
>>make sure it follows the law...after all we all want it to stick around
>>*grin*
>>
>>HTH,
>>Jake
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Tracy Carcione" <carcione@xxxxxxxxx>
>>To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 8:26 AM
>>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] boot camp for christians
>>
>>
>>> Mike,
>>> I don't think we have to worry so much about what the copyright office
>>has,
>>> or doesn't have, so long as there is a copyright name and date in the
>>book.
>>> We aren't lawyers, just volunteers. If the book says so-and-so has the
>>> copyright, that should be good enough. I don't want to know the
>>intracacies
>>> of copyright law! :.)
>>> Tracy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.9/39 - Release Date: 7/4/2005
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
