DM Smith wrote: > ... It is hit or miss as to whether a particular file is present or > not, or corrupt or not. ...
That is surprising. I can understand linking directly to the files on the original site as long as those files match the page as it was when archived. I can also understand linking to dummy files. Seems like they would be taking a big risk if they are doing as you say. > While poking around in the wayback machine, I found vines.README (from > '98, IIRC) that said that the current re-copyright expires in 2002. If > true, I'd like to see it made available. > As I remember it, the 2002 date was based on misunderstanding of the restored copyright term. If you take the original date published as 1940 and a restored copyright having a 95 year term, then it will expire in 2035. See: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38b.pdf Jerry _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
