FormCritic wrote:I don't understand why this discussion would be controversial in any way.
mbassoc2003 wrote:When the auctions were originally held, no-one knew the auctioneer was keeping backup scans of the products being sold.It wasn't until after the RJK auction that it became common knowledge that these items were being scanned before they were sold.So there could be unease when a buyer pays $hundreds for a manuscript, and later finds the unknown scan being used to reprint copies for people.Technically, the original IP owner has the right to secretly request copies or consent to digital copies being stored by the auctioneer, and of course now we just assume that the auctioneer scanning everything before he sells it, and it;s not impacting on price. But at the time it was rather a shady way of doing business. I dare say, if the auction had read, 'a scan of this manuscript has been retained and may be used for future re-publication', it'd have had an impact on sale value.
Improv wrote:mbassoc2003 wrote:When the auctions were originally held, no-one knew the auctioneer was keeping backup scans of the products being sold.It wasn't until after the RJK auction that it became common knowledge that these items were being scanned before they were sold.So there could be unease when a buyer pays $hundreds for a manuscript, and later finds the unknown scan being used to reprint copies for people.Technically, the original IP owner has the right to secretly request copies or consent to digital copies being stored by the auctioneer, and of course now we just assume that the auctioneer scanning everything before he sells it, and it;s not impacting on price. But at the time it was rather a shady way of doing business. I dare say, if the auction had read, 'a scan of this manuscript has been retained and may be used for future re-publication', it'd have had an impact on sale value.If I find certain manuscripts are being reprinted based upon previously undisclosed scanned copies then Ethesis, Paul and I are going to have some strong words. The IP ownership was made clear at the time of auction. There is no doubt in my mind given the wording used during the auction that Ethesis was hoping some individuals would help carry the torch with those manuscripts and not just be picked up by a collector for storage.
mbassoc2003 wrote:FormCritic wrote:I don't understand why this discussion would be controversial in any way.When the auctions were originally held, no-one knew the auctioneer was keeping backup scans of the products being sold.It wasn't until after the RJK auction that it became common knowledge that these items were being scanned before they were sold.
mbassoc2003 wrote:So there could be unease when a buyer pays $hundreds for a manuscript, and later finds the unknown scan being used to reprint copies for people.
Improv wrote:If I find certain manuscripts are being reprinted based upon previously undisclosed scanned copies then Ethesis, Paul and I are going to have some strong words. The IP ownership was made clear at the time of auction. There is no doubt in my mind given the wording used during the auction that Ethesis was hoping some individuals would help carry the torch with those manuscripts and not just be picked up by a collector for storage.
FormCritic wrote:I thought this thread was about using the manuscript to bring the finished product back to print.Is this thread actually just about printing a copy of the manuscript?
Badmike wrote:If Doug and I can get permission, the original manuscript of Mistworld along with many other papers of Steve will get scanned and made available for research purposes. These will be copies made from the originals and not any stored PDFs or such.Mike B.
Improv wrote:Badmike wrote:If Doug and I can get permission, the original manuscript of Mistworld along with many other papers of Steve will get scanned and made available for research purposes. These will be copies made from the originals and not any stored PDFs or such.Mike B.Hey Mike. Doesn't sound like a bad idea ....