[Gord]

Originally Posted by Diligent

I recently bought three gilded KJVs and noticed the pages needed to be separated to avoid fumbling when paging for a verse. I just sat down and turned each page, one after the other, in all three, until it was done. I think I was watching the news while I did it. (I didn't do it all in one sitting.)

Thanks, it's exactly what I'm doing. (if only I could speed read too)

[Gord]

Originally Posted by chette777

I feel akward Like I dont take good enough care of my Bible. Gord wants one to last years and I cant get mine to make it but three years or so.

The KJV Cambridge was the first choice, I went for the quality as a 2nd choice after comparing the differences.

Originally Posted by chette777

My Bible is supposed to be the old Scolfield Bible wide margin given to me in 2003 and I already need to buy another. A friend bought me a large print last May 2007 while we visited in Virginia for 3 months. but a man here needed one so bad because he could not see the smaller print so I gave my brand new large print Bible to him.

You will be blessed for that kindness.

Originally Posted by chette777

My current KJV Scolfield has so many underlines, my notes in the margins, and extra cross references I added in teh center collum from reading it through so many times the last few years. it's pages are already worn and dog eared.

I still pull out my old Scolfield to compare his notes and for a different opinion or view from time to time, it too has seen much underlining and cross referencing. The real beauty of the cambridge is that I can read more, with less mental interruption from having the 'notes' constantly taking your mind off the content what the Word is actually saying.

[chette777]

basically I learned to ignore the Scolfield notes. if they weren't there I would have more room.

I have created in word format a KJV Personal study Bible, it has wide pargins, a blank center collumn to make your own cross references, a blank at the beginning of each chapter and at topic change points for your own titles and subtitles, it has a blank section of lines at the bottom of each page for your own notes and study, at the beginning of each book it has a blank lined page for both a short and expanded outline, I have added maps that are from public domain and if I could put an old Websters 1827 dictionary in it I would.

I have filled for a copyright here and in the States the only problem is the Lawyers want $300 each to file the copyright and a percentage of sales. No one wants to publish it, they say people are basically to lazy to study for themselves and prefere Study Bibles that do most of the work for them, plus with all the study Bibles out there like the Pastor's Outlined Bible, Life Application study Bible, Youth study Bibles, Inductive Study Bible, Experiencing God Study Bible etc... most of them are in NIV, NKJV, The Living Bible, NASB and others. you can get them in KJV but they correct a lot of the English with greek translations from Roman Catholic Manuscripts of Westcot and Hort, Neslies New Greek etc...

I have created a KJV Study Bible that promotes 2 Timothy 2:15.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by chette777

I have filled for a copyright here and in the States the only problem is the Lawyers want $300 each to file the copyright and a percentage of sales.

Registering a copyright is easy to do yourself, at least in the US. I wouldn't waste $300 on it. In fact, you don't even need to "file" a copyright unless you are worried about getting legal fees in a lawsuit. Anything that can be copyrighted is copyrighted by default in US law.

However, what is the copyright for, anyway? The text of the KJV is in the public domain (everywhere except perhaps the UK). Copyright is not for layout but for creative content. If you have your own study notes and cross-references, those qualify for copyright.

Here's some more information: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html

Hope this helps.

[Steven Avery]

Hi folks,

Originally Posted by Diligent

Copyright is not for layout but for creative content.

Brandon, I think you are mistaken on this.

The reason a Hong Kong publisher violates copyright is often precisely a layout infringement. They simply buy an American copy and seek to copy page by page and it is infringement even if the creative writing is off copyright. Concepts like layout and "look and feel" and such come up in copyright cases frequently. The Elisha Quimron case with the DSS was a layout oriented case. Computer data format of a Bible and other books is "layout" and very much protected.

http://www.copyright.monash.edu.au/tips-students.html
published editions of works (eg while authors have copyright in text of their books publishers have copyright in the typographical layout of books)

And if you are a self-publisher, you have the copyright protection.

I agree that filing for protection is often a waste, just for the lawyers. Simply keep careful records of what you published, where and when and how.

Shalom,
Steven

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Brandon, I think you are mistaken on this.

It really depends on what Bro. Chette is publishing. He is not going to qualify for a copyright on a Bible printing if he has not introduced any substantially creative work in its production. That's what copyright covers -- creative works.

Bro. Chette may want to review Copyright Circular 14 (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf ) which deals with copyright of derivative works (which any publication of the KJV would be). From the document:

"To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a new work or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable."

This is probably getting way off-topic for this forum, though. I don't think any of us are copyright attorneys. But I have learned quite a bit about this very subject since my own line of work has me dealing a lot with new formats of old, public domain texts.

Also, I am only speaking about US copyright law, not law for the Philippines or Australia, which can of course differ except issues where the Berne convention is prevailing authority.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Fair enough. In the reproduction of simple derivative works, as from the King James Bible, without enough original, creative material for copyright protection, your format and layout itself are not copyrightable.

Notice that "compilation or arrangement" is eligible for copyright protection, even of derivative works, and that is an area that overlaps layout and format.

http://www.geocities.com/feelthewind...copyright.html
If the underlying work is in the public domain, a copyright in the derivative or collective work does not render the underlying work protectable. Thus, the copyright in a derivative or collective work merely protects against copying or otherwise infringing the particular compilation or arrangement of a collective work, or the original contribution contained in the derivative work.

Notice that in the examples by Brandon from the Copyright Office : "Best Short Stories of 2006..." involves original authorship for deciding on and presenting the stories, even though each individual work is derivative. Similarly, your unique collection of "the neatest public domain commentaries and maps and notes" could qualify for similar compilation and arrangement protection. You have no rights to the texts themselves yet rights can be generated by your compilation, even if you added no fundamental creative commentary. And in such a case your protection is only to your compilation and arrangement and intro and such, not the source texts. (A lot of people would take a "who cares" approach if it were anything less that a major publisher concerned with Chinese or Korean knock-off publishing.)

When Thomas Nelson puts together a little paperback KJB they put the earlier distinct copyright notices on their Concordance (1968) and the Gospel Harmony (1962) and the maps (1984,83). Yet also the Bible edition as a whole, in front of the King James Bible text (1970 in one case,, 1972 in another) is given a copyright, and I believe that is likely valid. Representing the particular compilation and arrangement of Bible text, Gospel Harmony, maps and concordance. How the copyright can be earlier than some of the components is a bit of a puzzle, perhaps because in an earlier edition they used other maps and such and the © is meant for their 'Life & Styles' editions.

(We all understand that putting in a copyright notice does not mean that it is necessarily a valid copyright. As an example, I'm sure somebody who wanted to do a very similar work to the KJB/21 Millenium Bible "update" could challenge their copyright of original material of a largely KJB text if Douel took them to court. Douel would be very reluctant to bring a case for that reason. As we know, all such editions have large flaws.)

As a side-issue I wonder also what are the Douel publishing rights within UK, whether that issue could come up. I also wonder if there is defacto prevention of KJB publishing by the non-authorized in UK.

Anyway, all this is why compilation and arrangement overlaps layout.

And note: when there is a copyright for new work, that copyright will often include layout and format aspects as part of their copyright protection. That was part of my original point.

Note: if you apply a unique computer format the format is more than a minor change or addition, it is fundamental, and should be protected. That is why you cannot simply lift and present a proprietary computer-formatted text as "fair use" or "public domain" unless the format itself is public. And that is why there is an attempt to have an open source alternative to .gif for pics. .txt is open, Brandon would probably know the details on .pdf I think it is freely distributable.

Incidentally, Yoko Ono is pursuing a copyright case for the song that goes..

"Imagine no possessions ..."

As noted on this good blog.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/expel...copyrightable/
Is “Imagine” Even Copyrightable? - William Dembski

Shalom,
Steven

[chette777]

Wow, I had to read through all that and it is informative. Thanks for the links and insights. you guys are awsome. you think faster than I do that's for sure.

No, you guys are not really off subject. we are talking about helpng to find a Quality Bible. that would include the developement of such a Bible as I have shared. I only have a few books of the Bible completed actually in word format as a sample, and some instruction pages. I am sure some one with page maker software could do a better style and layout. and yet others to add some of their study ideas would be helpful too.

It just came to me one time when I was so frustrated looking for a good Quality Bible that I could use to compile my yearly study through the Bible. there wasn't any. I found a need, and came up with an idea to fill it. but that is as far as I have gotten because I have no means to get it to the Market.

Do you guys think it is a good idea that should be pursued?

My idea was just to create an Individual's Study Bible, a Bible of the uniquely designed to accomodate your own, outlines, notes and cross references. No one has created one yet and it would be unique in that matter. I have prepared instruction on how to use and study using the Idividual's Study Bible (similar to those I gave Staphen on his Isaiah Bible study forum), plus I talk about the five types of literature found in the Bible, and have a set on rightly dividing. that work might be enough to qualify it for such a copyright.

but my depest desire is just to see it published and put out on the market for serious Bible students to do their own study of the Bible. when they are done they have a uniquely personal study Bible. when finished buy another and start all over again.

I am a simple man actually. I am not up on all the tricks of the trade, nor do know many people, let alone someone who could finiances something like this. even if someone else did it first I don't care as long as a Bible of this type could be done. The closest was the Inductive Study Bible in NASV, however they still give you their study notes and word changes too.

[JaeByrd]

Not a "study Bible", but along the lines of reading through the Bible in a year/Reading plans you might want to check out: http://www.dailybibleandprayer.com/

It has a selection of reading plans in addition to custom plans you can make up yourself. Plus a daily devotion and a prayer tracker.

[chette777]

Jae

there are so many read through the Bible programs out there. I have one that is good I found it is an old smith's Bible dictionary written around 1915