A Question for Experts Here

[Richley Crapo]

Thanks. This leads to a second question: If copyright no longer pertains, does this simply reduce the procedure to paying the holder of the material to produce a glossy print or digital scan and would it be improper to do this oneself using a secondary publication (e.g., Dibble's reproduction of the Codice Xolotl) rather than going through the actual holder of the original document?
Richley 

>>> s.levack at BTINTERNET.COM 02/01/05 04:16 AM >>>
Richley Crapo wrote:

<<when the original source is a Nahuatl manuscript such as Xolotl or
Anonymo where the original is housed in a library, does the library
typically assert control of all copyright authority so that they are the
entity that must grant permission or is the several hundred years age of
such a document place it into public domain?>>

Having wrestled with the same problem I think the answer is that it's in
the public domain. According to the US Copyright Office

"Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other copy or
phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. The law provides
that transfer of ownership of any material object that embodies a
protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright."
(US Copyright Office Circular 1, Revised December 2004)

For the full text of the circular, follow this link:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc

Simon Levack
Author of the Aztec Mysteries
Please take a few moments to visit my website at
www.simonlevack.com