6 ms·

For a literature-focused list of items entering the US public domain on 2026, Standard Ebooks has 20 ebooks prepared for release on January 1: https://standarde

by acabal 10mo ago

For a literature-focused list of items entering the US public domain on 2026, Standard Ebooks has 20 ebooks prepared for release on January 1: https://standardebooks.org/blog/public-domain-day-2026 https://standardebooks.org/blog/public-domain-day-2026

fsckboy 10mo ago
I don't think that they are allowed to prepare copyrighted items for release in advance of them being in the public domain.
- kec 10mo ago
  Why would that be the case? Copyright (at least in the US) only restricts distribution, performance and derivation.
  - fsckboy 10mo ago
    no, it restricts copying, making copies
    - kec 10mo ago
      “Copying” here refers to distribution and derivation, at least in the US. It is entirely legal to create copies of media for personal usage for instance (so long as you aren’t circumventing DRM, thanks DMCA).
      - whamlastxmas 10mo ago
        This isn't correct. It is infringement, for example, to write Harry Potter fan fiction in private on a typewriter, even if another soul never sees it. Copyright includes creation, not just distribution
        panja 10mo ago
        Better let AO3 in on that
        kec 10mo ago
        What you describe would almost certainly be considered fair use until point of distribution - it’s non commercial, transformative and has no meaningful impact on the market value of Harry Potter. Copies for private use are going to be similar, and while I’m not a lawyer it feels like it’d be a hard case to make that work being conducted in private is going to have a meaningful impact on the market for Nancy Drew novels in the next 30 days.
        93po 10mo ago
        Market harm is not required for something to count as infringement, but it matters for certain defenses and damages. Simply writing new adventures for existing copyrighted characters is usually treated as creating an unauthorized derivative work. Writing Harry Potter from the perspective of the Weasley twins, for example, is not fair use. Distribution is one part of fair use but it isn't the focus of it - fair use is a defense against infringement, but it's still infringement. You're really missing the crux of fair use: "Noncommercial, educational, critical, or transformative uses (like commentary, criticism, news reporting, parody, or research)" How closely does writing Harry Potter fanfiction align with commentary, criticism, news reporting, parody, or research? Fair use is more about: writing a critique about Harry Potter. Or a Weird Al style song about it. Or presenting parts of it in a paper you're writing for class. This is all easily searchable stuff. Copyright is extremely draconian when you really look into it.
        boomboomsubban 10mo ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#4._Effect_upon_work's_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#4._Effect_upon_work's... Seems to say that market harm is the single most important factor in fair use, and it's basically impossible to show that a person writing their own fan fiction without any distribution would prevent an author from exploiting their own work.
      - fsckboy 10mo ago
        from the about page: Standard Ebooks is organized as a “low-profit L.L.C.,” or “L3C,” a kind of legal entity that blends the charitable focus of a traditional not-for-profit with the ease of organization and maintenance of a regular L.L.C. corporations cannot make "personal copies" of copyrighted works, otherwise they'd buy just one copy of microsoft office
        swiftcoder 10mo ago
        > corporations cannot make "personal copies" of copyrighted works, otherwise they'd buy just one copy of microsoft office That would surely be a license violation, not a copyright violation? They absolutely can (and do) make copies of the Microsoft office binary and shuttle it around their network/backups/etc, activating licenses only when they need to assign a copy to a particular user
- robin_reala 10mo ago
  I prepared three of the works listed here for Standard Ebooks, and I’m not in the US so I’m definitely not covered by US copyright law on my own machine.

by acabal 10mo ago

fsckboy 10mo ago

I don't think that they are allowed to prepare copyrighted items for release in advance of them being in the public domain.

kec 10mo ago
Why would that be the case? Copyright (at least in the US) only restricts distribution, performance and derivation.
- fsckboy 10mo ago
  no, it restricts copying, making copies
  - kec 10mo ago
    “Copying” here refers to distribution and derivation, at least in the US. It is entirely legal to create copies of media for personal usage for instance (so long as you aren’t circumventing DRM, thanks DMCA).
    - whamlastxmas 10mo ago
      This isn't correct. It is infringement, for example, to write Harry Potter fan fiction in private on a typewriter, even if another soul never sees it. Copyright includes creation, not just distribution
      - panja 10mo ago
        Better let AO3 in on that
      - kec 10mo ago
        What you describe would almost certainly be considered fair use until point of distribution - it’s non commercial, transformative and has no meaningful impact on the market value of Harry Potter. Copies for private use are going to be similar, and while I’m not a lawyer it feels like it’d be a hard case to make that work being conducted in private is going to have a meaningful impact on the market for Nancy Drew novels in the next 30 days.
        93po 10mo ago
        Market harm is not required for something to count as infringement, but it matters for certain defenses and damages. Simply writing new adventures for existing copyrighted characters is usually treated as creating an unauthorized derivative work. Writing Harry Potter from the perspective of the Weasley twins, for example, is not fair use. Distribution is one part of fair use but it isn't the focus of it - fair use is a defense against infringement, but it's still infringement. You're really missing the crux of fair use: "Noncommercial, educational, critical, or transformative uses (like commentary, criticism, news reporting, parody, or research)" How closely does writing Harry Potter fanfiction align with commentary, criticism, news reporting, parody, or research? Fair use is more about: writing a critique about Harry Potter. Or a Weird Al style song about it. Or presenting parts of it in a paper you're writing for class. This is all easily searchable stuff. Copyright is extremely draconian when you really look into it.
        boomboomsubban 10mo ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#4._Effect_upon_work's_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#4._Effect_upon_work's... Seems to say that market harm is the single most important factor in fair use, and it's basically impossible to show that a person writing their own fan fiction without any distribution would prevent an author from exploiting their own work.
    - fsckboy 10mo ago
      from the about page: Standard Ebooks is organized as a “low-profit L.L.C.,” or “L3C,” a kind of legal entity that blends the charitable focus of a traditional not-for-profit with the ease of organization and maintenance of a regular L.L.C. corporations cannot make "personal copies" of copyrighted works, otherwise they'd buy just one copy of microsoft office
      - swiftcoder 10mo ago
        > corporations cannot make "personal copies" of copyrighted works, otherwise they'd buy just one copy of microsoft office That would surely be a license violation, not a copyright violation? They absolutely can (and do) make copies of the Microsoft office binary and shuttle it around their network/backups/etc, activating licenses only when they need to assign a copy to a particular user
robin_reala 10mo ago
I prepared three of the works listed here for Standard Ebooks, and I’m not in the US so I’m definitely not covered by US copyright law on my own machine.