We did try the Linux script, and compiled a version of the Inform compiler that would work, but I ended up putting one of the precompiled binaries that didn't work into the kit by mistake. I've just updated it to fix this.
Glad you got it working on your system already -- have fun.
But history proves you wrong, AC. Before 1963 works were only protected by copyright for 28 years, unless they were renewed. Many of them were not: It's a Wonderful Life is a prominent example, but there's also some Loeb classics translations, other films,music, etc. If people and companies chose not to renew the copyrights when it was unprofitable to do so back before 1968, why would they bother to "renew" them under this law?
And, needless to say, with this law you wouldn't have to risk being sued to use some 52-year-old material that was genuinely abandoned. You would be able to know that it was in the public domain, if it was, and know that the copyright holder actively wanted to keep the copyright, otherwise. You wouldn't have to test the waters by risking a lawsuit, as in the scenario you describe.
I'm surprised at the comments that suggest this bill doesn't matter because it can only hope to free up those copyrighted works with no commercial value. Here we have stories about the Intellivision operating system drawing hundreds of comments, articles all the time about classicconsole and arcade video games, news of public domain audiobooks, and talk about a huge amount of "content" that clearly has no commercial value but is still really interesting, fun, and/or enlightening.
Yes, some of the stuff I've mentioned does sometimes make an appearance in a commercial product like a 25-in-1 game controller or something, but there are still huge amounts of old computer games, books, films, music, and other media that are never going to make anyone a cent again. Some of these still would be nice to have around and have access to. Some of this stuff might be "sampled" or otherwise incorporated into new works of art, some might be used for historical or other academic research, and some of it might just be watched or read or listened to or played with by a small group of people who aren't much of a "market" but who still appreciate this work being available instead of lost in an corporate bureaucracy.
I've written an essay, "In Search of Webs Past," on the topic of archiving the Web. It's in the current issue of Technology Review. One of the things I point out is that the Internet Archive (because of some of the legal problems mentioned in the original post, and additional issues) is not going to be the sole solution for archiving the Web. I do see such archiving as very necessary from several standpoints besides the "slice of life" historical one - media history and criticism being one of them. Those with an interest in these aspects of the topic might wish to take a look at my essay, and continue the discussion either here or at the Tech Review forum about the essay.
Slashdot Mirror
We did try the Linux script, and compiled a version of the Inform compiler that would work, but I ended up putting one of the precompiled binaries that didn't work into the kit by mistake. I've just updated it to fix this.
Glad you got it working on your system already -- have fun.
But history proves you wrong, AC. Before 1963 works were only protected by copyright for 28 years, unless they were renewed. Many of them were not: It's a Wonderful Life is a prominent example, but there's also some Loeb classics translations, other films, music, etc. If people and companies chose not to renew the copyrights when it was unprofitable to do so back before 1968, why would they bother to "renew" them under this law?
And, needless to say, with this law you wouldn't have to risk being sued to use some 52-year-old material that was genuinely abandoned. You would be able to know that it was in the public domain, if it was, and know that the copyright holder actively wanted to keep the copyright, otherwise. You wouldn't have to test the waters by risking a lawsuit, as in the scenario you describe.
I'm surprised at the comments that suggest this bill doesn't matter because it can only hope to free up those copyrighted works with no commercial value. Here we have stories about the Intellivision operating system drawing hundreds of comments, articles all the time about classic console and arcade video games, news of public domain audiobooks, and talk about a huge amount of "content" that clearly has no commercial value but is still really interesting, fun, and/or enlightening.
Yes, some of the stuff I've mentioned does sometimes make an appearance in a commercial product like a 25-in-1 game controller or something, but there are still huge amounts of old computer games, books, films, music, and other media that are never going to make anyone a cent again. Some of these still would be nice to have around and have access to. Some of this stuff might be "sampled" or otherwise incorporated into new works of art, some might be used for historical or other academic research, and some of it might just be watched or read or listened to or played with by a small group of people who aren't much of a "market" but who still appreciate this work being available instead of lost in an corporate bureaucracy.
I've written an essay, "In Search of Webs Past," on the topic of archiving the Web. It's in the current issue of Technology Review. One of the things I point out is that the Internet Archive (because of some of the legal problems mentioned in the original post, and additional issues) is not going to be the sole solution for archiving the Web. I do see such archiving as very necessary from several standpoints besides the "slice of life" historical one - media history and criticism being one of them. Those with an interest in these aspects of the topic might wish to take a look at my essay, and continue the discussion either here or at the Tech Review forum about the essay.
-Nick M.