12/31/77 would take us up to RR issue #150 (October 1977). The final issue was RR 253/254 (January 1995), which leaves us only 18 years of non-PD issues. Yes, many of Lenny's pasteups are crooked - I straightened as best I could after scanning. All my page-by-page scans are as jpgs but putting them into Adobe pdf format wouldn't be a problem. I'll have to experiment to see if the OCR will work on the odd, small type sizes and/or the off-center pasteups. Malcolm ******* On 10/24/2012 7:04 AM, Sam Brylawski wrote: > My understanding is that any work (other than a sound recording!) > published in the U.S.before 1/1/1978 without a copyright notice is > public domain. Period. After 1/1/1978, it's a different story. If > Malcolm is correct about no notices, and I'm confident that he is, all > those earlier issues are PD. Addressing a part of the initial > question, the paid-for version of Adobe has an OCR tool built-in. How > it would deal with the minuscule type and crooked paste-ups of RR is > another story. > > Sam Brylawski > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Malcolm Rockwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> I have all the primary Record Research issues scanned and many of the >> bulletins, as well as many of the the Blues Research and the Americana >> series. I also worked up an index for the primary issues. >> I had worked out a deal with Lenny's niece (sitting in for her mom who may >> have passed by now) but then copyright questions arose and I shelved the >> project. I still have all the digital files, though. >> If anyone can establish with any finality who owned RR I would happily >> finish the project and distribute it or release it to someone who will. >> There is the question of a possible co-owner and/or long time collaborator >> that could be a major copyright problem, even for releasing privately for a >> low price. >> BTW, there are no copyright notices anywhere in the entire magazine run but >> I'm told that is meaningless. I really do not want to end up in court and do >> not have the money to get lawyers involved in any of this! >> "Publish and be damned" is fine for one's own material; not so good for >> someone else's stuff. >> Regards, >> Malcolm Rockwell >> >> ******* >> >> >> On 10/24/2012 3:12 AM, Mason Vander Lugt wrote: >>> Hi ARSC, >>> >>> I know some of you were involved in the writing and publication of Record >>> Research Magazine. Can any of you tell me decisively whether anyone would >>> contest the free distribution of PDF scans of the magazine? I emailed the >>> representative of Spivey Records (my best guess for a 'rightsholder'), but >>> got no response. I've been collecting them when I can find them, and now >>> have about half of the full run scanned (less the sales lists). >>> >>> Does anybody have any of the issues listed below that they would be >>> willing >>> to lend, give or sell to me? I intend to put them up for free download >>> when >>> I'm finished. >>> >>> Finally, I think they would be much more useful if the text was >>> searchable. >>> Can anyone recommend a good (free?) OCR service that can accept PDF files? >>> >>> Thanks in advance for any help or advice, >>> Mason Vander Lugt >>> Still needed: >>> >>> 1-42, except 17, 19-20, 22-24, 27 >>> 51/52 >>> 112-220 except 189/190, 201/202 >>> >>> (If my math seems fuzzy to you, it's because they were published in >>> double-issues after 112) >>>