They accept donations: https://archive.org/donate/
In fact, per Wikipedia it was published in 1964.
Yet if you open the IA copy at the linked page you will see "First published 1923".
Heck, here's another: The Doomsday Men by J.B. Priestly, "First published 1923" but in fact in 1937.
Man the Roaring 20's had a shitload of authors...
I cannot think of any other reason than a typo in the original prints, and the people reponsible for digitizing the books have mechanically filed them with the date reported in the body as that of the first edition.
Maybe it is the equivalent of a modern day copy/paste error, they got the sheets reporting the first edition mixed-up with those of another book, who knows.
> There are ways the historian can read between the lines of the recipes, so to speak to answer questions that are not directly related to cooking or material culture but may deal with gender roles, issues of class, ethnicity and race. Even topics such as politics, religion and world view are revealed in the commentary found in cookbooks and sometimes embedded in what appears to be a simple recipe. The most valuable of cookbooks and related culinary texts also reveal what we might call complete food ideologies...
> Nor should any of these caveats prevent the historian from cooking historic recipes today. There is something palpably direct to be gained from tasting food from the past, in much the same way as one can learn from hearing a symphony on period instruments or viewing an old painting in a museum. The esthetic values that inform flavor preferences of the past are indeed very different from our own. Some ingredients people enjoyed would today be considered abhorrent; some flavors and textures bizarre if not disgusting. But this should not deter the intrepid investigator... What one learns from such an exercise is a feeling for the embodied experience of physically carrying out certain culinary tasks and a direct apprehension of what the palates of our forebears might have experienced.
You'll recognize most of the ingredients well enough based on my reprint of the 1884 Boston Cooking School Cook Book. But a lot of meats are going to be different enough that you'd want to change the prep. And, to most modern tastes, the recipes are just not going to be very good. I still keep some of the cookbooks handed down from my mother (like old Gourmet cookbooks from the 1960s or so). And even those are just not that useful for how I cook today.
Lots of interesting 18th century cooking and other period skills.
Also, reading stuff that's just out there can help shake up your mind in interesting ways.
There are tons of possibilities.
Works published before 1964 in the US are all in the public domain, excepting only those for which a renewal was registered with the US Copyright Office. Relatively few works from this era have had their copyrights renewed. A US Copyright Office study in 1961 found that fewer than 15% of registered copyrights had been renewed.
Google Books, last time I looked, applied a blanket year-based cutoff rule and did not allow full view access to these works that failed to renew their copyrights, unless publishers explicitly opted in. Other institutions like the Internet Archive and HathiTrust have put more work into determining the copyright status of individual pre-1964 works and opening the public domain works up for full view.
There's lots of reasons why a work after 1923 might be in the public domain, but as of this year, everything before 1923 is in the public domain. I would guess FOSS/FLOSS software is probably the most likely thing people might recognize as "public domain-like" (due to the issue of taking something public domain, then copyrighting your original work on it e.g. Disney's erstwhile business model).
Copyright could have been abandoned, creator hasn't pursued their claim, it could have been specifically released by the creator, "copyleft", ...
It's probably the first two of your guesses, or the pre-1964 reason mentioned in a sibling comment. (There's stuff newer than that on the IA too, which are likely to be there because of the reasons originally mentioned.)
PGDP FAQ: https://www.pgdp.net/wiki/DP_Official_Documentation:General/...
PGDP Post-Processing FAQ: https://www.pgdp.net/wiki/DP_Official_Documentation:PP_and_P...
> On its journey through multiple proofreading and formatting rounds, the text may have been worked on by hundreds of volunteers. Post-processors must standardize the formatting of the book and adjust it to comply with Project Gutenberg's requirements. They must also deal with any detectable mistakes or inconsistencies that have survived all proofreading and formatting rounds.
> The ultimate goal of post-processing is to create a consistently formatted etext, that contains as few errors as possible and that accurately reflects the intentions of the author.
Edit: see sibling comment made at the same time. PG distributes pages to volunteers for proofreading.
Can anyone recommend something from 1923?
The Prophet, by Kahlil Gibran https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/58585
Men Like Gods, by H. G. Wells http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200221h.html
Leave It To Psmith, by P.G. Wodehouse https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.126397/page/n1
You won't have heard of any of those books from '23. Your English teacher picked books that they could get for next to nothing for a roomful of students (eg, public domain "classics"), or suck it up and fight for their absolute favorite book of all time.
So you're mostly going to hear of really old books in class, and really modern books from media and friends, and between that maybe the best 50 books from the last 50 years from proper literary mavens.
By moving the public domain forward in time you start opening up the opportunity for kids to hear about books from the 20's and 30's, things that might tie into History class (the Depression, the leadup to WWII) and thus into other aspects of life (civics, poli-sci, etc).
So your kids will know of books from the 20's, their kids books from the 40's (Tolkien), and so on. And your great great grandchild will encounter Harry Potter for the first time in the 7th grade.
I'm all for shorter copyright terms of course.
In the earliest book-heavy class I can recall, probably senior year of high school, we read a bunch of Edgar Allen Poe out of the textbook (Poe is out of copyright). There were book reports, but that was one copy per student and I think more than a few of us checked books out of the library for this.
I think Gatsby was the only book we had to buy that year. That book is from 1925, and should have been out of copyright decades ago. So that everyone could suffer^W enjoy it for free.
Overall I'd agree with you. Most of the specific titles I recognize from this list are dry, downbeat and not the strongest or most memorable work from those authors. The rest is either series material with characters or stuff that seems to have been forgotten.
Theres a translation of Da Vinci's notebooks mentioned on the website. One would hope that the original had fallen out of copyright by now, so its only the translation that is falling out of copyright.
You see many Spanish-speaking countries listed...?
Nevertheless, 13% of the US population are native Spanish speakers, and presumably more have some level of reading skills. Hard to judge overlap with HN readership, but it's probably fair to think that 4-5% of your sites readers can read Spanish.
Low. Very low. Think about the Hispanic population a little.
> but it's probably fair to think that 4-5% of your sites readers can read Spanish.
If they are, they aren't setting their OSes or browsers to use Spanish rather than English... An 'es' language code doesn't even show up in my GA language headers until #13 (consistent with the geoip), putting them at ~0.5% of all hits. I have more German, French, and Russian-preferring readers than Spanish (which is only slightly more popular than Portuguese). HN is cosmopolitan, but all the evidence I have is that it's not in a Spanish sort of way.
The collection New Hampshire seems to be from '23.
Here it is on a Canadian website (where it was already PD)
(also Richard Dawkins' favourite, curiously.
A powerful statement! I love the Internet Archive. It gives me hope for humanity.
You don't have permission to access /2019/01/11000-digitized-books-from-1923-are-now-available-online-at-the-internet-archive.html on this server.
Same with the site's root.
You don't have permission to access / on this server.
Anyone have a mirror of it handy?