5,950
edits
Project:The copyright status of Wittgenstein’s works: Difference between revisions
Project:The copyright status of Wittgenstein’s works (view source)
Revision as of 15:19, 29 December 2022
, 1 year agono edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{p center|By {{person link|Michele Lavazza}}<ref group="N">The author would like to thank Dr Jasmin Trächtler, Mr David Chandler, and Mr Javier Arango for reviewing this text. Additionally, he would like to extend sincere gratitude to Dr Nicolas Bell, the Librarian of Trinity College, who provided insightful comments on a draft of this essay; to Prof Alois Pichler of the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen, the conversations with whom helped give this essay its final shape; and to Dr Simone Aliprandi, legal expert and copyright specialist, for his consultancy.</ref>}} | {{p center|By {{person link|Michele Lavazza}}<ref group="N">The author would like to thank Dr Jasmin Trächtler, Mr David Chandler, and Mr Javier Arango for reviewing this text. Additionally, he would like to extend sincere gratitude to Dr Nicolas Bell, the Librarian of Trinity College, who provided insightful comments on a draft of this essay; to Prof Alois Pichler of the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen, the conversations with whom helped give this essay its final shape; and to Dr Simone Aliprandi, legal expert and copyright specialist, for his consultancy.</ref>}} | ||
{{p center| | {{p center|29 December 2022}} | ||
| Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
What was said above remains valid for the WAB transcriptions: insofar as creating a digital edition of a handwritten or typewritten text consists of a 1-to-1 substitution of some visual feature with the corresponding character or XML tag, the output is to be considered a faithtful reproduction of the original material and cannot, in and of itself, be copyrighted. However, two points must be stressed that were not relevant in the case we discussed previously, the example of the French translation of the ''Tractatus'', but are important here. | What was said above remains valid for the WAB transcriptions: insofar as creating a digital edition of a handwritten or typewritten text consists of a 1-to-1 substitution of some visual feature with the corresponding character or XML tag, the output is to be considered a faithtful reproduction of the original material and cannot, in and of itself, be copyrighted. However, two points must be stressed that were not relevant in the case we discussed previously, the example of the French translation of the ''Tractatus'', but are important here. | ||
The first point is that, even though the WAB’s transcriptions are produced in accordance with strict rules based on the {{plainlink|[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_Encoding_Initiative TEI Guidelines]}}, in many cases the transcriber is forced to propose what we may call an interpretation. This is, in turn, not only because Wittgenstein’s handwritten texts, unlike printed texts, may be difficult to decipher on the grounds of the quality of the author’s penmanship; but also and perhaps most importantly because the transcriber must systematically decide whether or not to include some visual items in the transcription based on whether or not they are semantically relevant, and to how to encode them based on what their semantical value is—which is not always trivial. In other words, very often, more than one way of encoding the text is consistent with the rules.<ref>In | The first point is that, even though the WAB’s transcriptions are produced in accordance with strict rules based on the {{plainlink|[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_Encoding_Initiative TEI Guidelines]}}, in many cases the transcriber is forced to propose what we may call an interpretation. This is, in turn, not only because Wittgenstein’s handwritten texts, unlike printed texts, may be difficult to decipher on the grounds of the quality of the author’s penmanship; but also and perhaps most importantly because the transcriber must systematically decide whether or not to include some visual items in the transcription based on whether or not they are semantically relevant, and to how to encode them based on what their semantical value is—which is not always trivial. In other words, very often, more than one way of encoding the text is consistent with the rules.<ref>In Alois Pichler, “{{plainlink|[http://wab.uib.no/alois/pichler-kirchb95a.pdf Transcriptions, Texts and Interpretation]}}”, in Kjell S. Johannessen and Tore Nordenstam (eds.), ''Culture and Value. Beiträge des 18. Internationalen Wittgenstein Symposiums. 13.-20. August 1995 Kirchberg am Wechsel'', ALWG, 1995, p. 695, retrieved 20 November 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/2/http://wab.uib.no/alois/pichler-kirchb95a.pdf archived URL]}}), Alois Pichler argues that “transcription work is essentially selective and interpretational in nature”. While this wording may be too bold, in the same paper (pp. 693–694) Pichler lists several good reasons why the WAB’s transcription cannot count as literatim transcriptions.</ref> Where there is room for this kind of uncertainty and an interpretation is needed to make up for the uncertainty, there is room for originality too. | ||
The second point is that the WAB’s transcriptions also make Wittgenstein’s implicit references to people and books explicit:<ref>See | The second point is that the WAB’s transcriptions also make Wittgenstein’s implicit references to people and books explicit:<ref>See Alois Pichler, ''Transcriptions, Texts and Interpretation'', p. 695.</ref> embedded in the XML files are also the full names of people Wittgenstein only mentions by surname or talks about without naming them at all; information about the books Wittgenstein discusses or quotes from without citing the full title; etc.; here, again, the transcriber can then be said to be responsible for an interpretation, and, again, where there is a margin for interpretation (when the multiplicity of the text is not exactly the multiplicity that is needed for the transcription to be unequivocal), there is room for originality too. | ||
When talking about the transcription of the French print edition of the ''Tractatus'', it was said that because the procedure was tantamount to copying, it did not generate a new copyright layer; when talking about the WAB transcriptions, it should be said that if or when the procedure was tantamount to copying, it did not generate a new copyright layer, but if or when it was not, it did. It could also be agreed to express this conclusion—which, incidentally, is an open conclusion, that does not claim to settle the question of the copyright status of the WAB’s XML files once and for all—by saying that, unlike the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s digital edition of the Granger translation of the ''Tractatus'', the WAB’s XML files, or at least some of them, are more than just transcriptions.<ref>This claim is made explicitly by Pichler in | When talking about the transcription of the French print edition of the ''Tractatus'', it was said that because the procedure was tantamount to copying, it did not generate a new copyright layer; when talking about the WAB transcriptions, it should be said that if or when the procedure was tantamount to copying, it did not generate a new copyright layer, but if or when it was not, it did. It could also be agreed to express this conclusion—which, incidentally, is an open conclusion, that does not claim to settle the question of the copyright status of the WAB’s XML files once and for all—by saying that, unlike the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s digital edition of the Granger translation of the ''Tractatus'', the WAB’s XML files, or at least some of them, are more than just transcriptions.<ref>This claim is made explicitly by Pichler in Alois Pichler, ''Transcriptions, Texts and Interpretation'', p. 690.</ref> | ||
| Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<p style="text-align: center; color: #54595d;">The first image is a scan of | <p style="text-align: center; color: #54595d;">The first image is a scan of Wittgenstein’s Ms-176,1v (from Wittgenstein Source). The second image is the corresponding WAB XML transcription. The <code><nowiki><del></del></nowiki></code> and <code><nowiki><add></add></nowiki></code> tags and their attributes, which account for Wittgenstein’s substitution of ''ist'' with ''wird'', can be considered a 1-to-1 substitutions of certain visual features with some conventional markup. On the other hand, the inclusion of a reference to a specific passage in Georg Lichtenberg’s ''Sudelbuch K'', which Wittgenstein does not cite explicitly, can be considered an addition, an interpretation, and a ground for arguing that there is room for originality in the role played by the transcriber.</p> | ||
=== The authorship issue === | === The authorship issue === | ||
| Line 311: | Line 311: | ||
If this were to count as the first edition, their country of origin would be the United Kingdom. This work is not in the public domain there because copyright on posthumously published literary works that were created before 1989 and first published more than 20 years after the author’s death expires 50 years after the publication date, and this work was published in 1977. | If this were to count as the first edition, their country of origin would be the United Kingdom. This work is not in the public domain there because copyright on posthumously published literary works that were created before 1989 and first published more than 20 years after the author’s death expires 50 years after the publication date, and this work was published in 1977. | ||
However, Ms-172, Ms-173, and Ms-176, in which Wittgenstein’s remarks on colour are contained and from which the 1977 edition was compiled, had already been published, albeit in a rather uncommon kind of edition. In 1967, looking to make the ''Nachlass'' available to scholars in its “raw” form, Cornell University microfilmed the corpus; the print version of the microfilms, i.e., a facsimile edition of (almost) the entire ''Nachlass'', was published by Cornell itself in 1968.<ref>''The Wittgenstein Papers'', Cornell University Libraries, Ithaca (NY) 1968. For more information, see | However, Ms-172, Ms-173, and Ms-176, in which Wittgenstein’s remarks on colour are contained and from which the 1977 edition was compiled, had already been published, albeit in a rather uncommon kind of edition. In 1967, looking to make the ''Nachlass'' available to scholars in its “raw” form, Cornell University microfilmed the corpus; the print version of the microfilms, i.e., a facsimile edition of (almost) the entire ''Nachlass'', was published by Cornell itself in 1968.<ref>''The Wittgenstein Papers'', Cornell University Libraries, Ithaca (NY) 1968. For more information, see Alois Pichler, “{{plainlink|[https://www.inst.at/trans/10Nr/pichler10.htm Encoding Wittgenstein. Some Remarks on Wittgenstein’s ''Nachlass'', the ''Bergen Electronic Edition'', and future electronic publishing and networking]}}”, in ''Trans. Internet-Zeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften'', no. 10, January 2002, retrieved 30 July 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/20220730162159/https://www.inst.at/trans/10Nr/pichler10.htm archived URL]}}).</ref> Even though it is a rather untypical book and even though, in particular, it lacks an imprint, the Cornell edition seems to meet the American legal definition of “publication”<ref>“‘Publication’ is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.” Title 17 of the United States Code (17 U. S. C.) §101. By this definition, there is no minimum number of copies to be attained for the distribution to count as a publication, nor there is the need for a formal registration or commercialisation. As Peter Hirtle writes, however, the following should be noted: “‘Publication’ was not explicitly defined in the Copyright Law before 1976, but the 1909 Act indirectly indicated that publication was when copies of the first authorized edition were placed on sale, sold, or publicly distributed by the proprietor of the copyright or under his authority.” See ''{{plainlink|1=[https://guides.library.cornell.edu/copyright/publicdomain Copyright Term and the Public Domain]}}'', Cornell University Library, retrieved 30 July 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/20220711133814/https://guides.library.cornell.edu/copyright/publicdomain archived URL]}}). The 1909 indication seems to stress commercialisation more than Title 17 does; at any rate, it seems that the Cornell edition was indeed sold to research institutes worldwide: see Alois Pichler, “{{plainlink|[https://www.inst.at/trans/10Nr/pichler10.htm Encoding Wittgenstein. Some Remarks on Wittgenstein’s ''Nachlass'', the ''Bergen Electronic Edition'', and future electronic publishing and networking”]}}, in ''Trans. Internet-Zeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften'', no. 10, January 2022, retrieved 30 July 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/20220730162159/https://www.inst.at/trans/10Nr/pichler10.htm archived URL]}}).</ref> and the ''Bemerkungen über die Farben'', which were part of this publication,<ref>Michael Biggs, Alois Pichler, “Wittgenstein: Two Source Catalogues and a Bibliography. Catalogues of the Published Texts and of the Published Diagrams, each Related to its Sources”, in ''Working Papers from the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen'', no. 7, 1993.</ref> must therefore be considered to have the US as their country of origin. Possibly because of being published by a university library for mere research purposes, however, this edition did not bear a copyright notice. Works first published in the US between 1927 and 1977 without a copyright notice are in the public domain there, because at the time this formality was a necessary condition for the work to be copyrighted at all.<ref name="hirtle-chart" /> Thus, the ''Bemerkungen über die Farben'' are in the public domain in their country of origin. They are also in the public domain in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works there is 70 years P.M.A. and the author died before 1952. | ||
=== Über Gewißheit === | === Über Gewißheit === | ||