[free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud

[Jon O .]

This is really nuts. I'm going to get me some fonts and take over...


This is what I posted to the yahoo board:


> [Michael Hart's WEB-LAW reference to the Anti-DMCA Index]
> "26. Number of restrictions placed on 'Alice in Wonderland' (public 
domain)
> eBook:  5
> 
> I guess I would like to reiterate that this version of Alice is not 
public
> domain but is a unique new work and copyrightable. My work on 
recapturing
> Carroll's exact typography and design was probably more exhaustive 
than his
> original work. It's copyrighted for that reason. But since the 
original
> work involved far more than just typography, I give it away as a 
tribute to
> Carroll's contribution. Since my work can't easily be detached from
> Carroll's in this form, my copyright gives me the right to control 
its use,
> but I keep it open. I certainly did not ask that the "Read Aloud"
> restriction be set on it, and Adobe has said that it was an 
accident in
> this case.


This is very interesting and I'm not sure I understand entirely. From 
your example above, it would seem that certain typographical changes 
actually create new ownership of a work. This is hard for me to 
understand. Does this apply only to public domain books? Meaning, can 
I provide typographical enhancements to a public domain book and 
therefore create new copyright? If this is true, I can see many 
designers suddenly restoring books digitally with typographical 
enhancements and claiming ownership. 

Also, how can the act of *recapturing* be "more exhaustive" than the 
original itself? Isn't the original what is being recaptured not an 
enhancement?