Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Busby permission

["Captain Nemo" <vulcania@interpac.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Nuytten" <72020.572@compuserve.com>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 4:01 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Busby permission


> Hi, Ray:
>         My, the Busby thing got a strong reaction from the gallery! I
think
> you are right to want to avoid what looks like it could be problematical -
> or just plain more work than it was originally thought to be - and double
> ditto on any potential legal involvement - life is just too short to
listen
> to a couple of lawyers contradict each other - while both meters keep
> running merrily on.
>         In my discussion with Jim Joiner I certainly got the impression
> that he stopped the project  with Frank's death because it was to be an
> update, not just a re-issue of existing material. Jim said " Well. if Andy
> wants to get involved, we could sure look at picking it up where we left
> off . . ." Joiner has no expertise in this field, and would have to rely
on
> outside experts - guys like Don Walsh, or Will Foreman, or John Whitney,
or
> Doug Privett, or a dozen, or so, others - to provide the factual material.
> Andy Busby, likewise, has no expertise in this field . .but he could
> coordinate the effort, rely on some of his father's contacts, and just
> generally make sure that it gets done.(  Andy, by the way, is not a kid -
> he is a fortyish guy who works as computer specialist for some large
outfit
> in Florida.)Jim Joiner will not do this thing on his own or on Best's
> behalf - it's just too much work. If Andy wasn't willing to work on it,
> Best wouldn't do an update. They  may wish to do a re-issue, since that's
a
> no-brainer . . . just check out the photo rights and do it. It was Jim who
> told me that very often in the public domain stuff, the photo rights are
> one time use, and have to be re-authorized for another edition - but also
> very often, there is no record of what was agreed! . They do this stuff
all
> the time. I don't pretend to have any expertise ( Jon's comments
> notwithstanding) in publishing, but Joiner sure does! I know that in my
> published efforts, the photo rights were sometimes 'one use', sometimes
> 'full permission' ( whatever that can be interperted to mean!) but most
> often, simply did not specify. If Frank failed to get the proper releases
> for a public domain document . . .so, sue him! Along this line,  Jonathan
> asked what evidence I had that the photo rights were not in the public
> domain . . .or words to that effect. Well, I supplied a number of the
> pictures of our stuff and signed no releases, and I sure as hell still own
> the copyrights on those shots. Frank asked me for photos, I gave him a
> bunch and he used what he wanted. I suspect that the same is true for at
> least some amount of the other  material in the book. Having said that, if
> some reasonable person wanted to use our material on a Busby reprint, I
> would have no objection at all. I believe that  all or most of the
> copyright holders would feel the same way and authorize the re-use as a
> matter of course. The problem is that you can't sure without checking with
> everybody. I think that was the basic point that Joiner wanted to make and
> I tried to pass on.
>         If Joiner and Busby decide not to do anything on an up-date, or
> something doesn't happen in a reasonable time frame ( insert your own
> definition of 'reasonable') then I think that a reprint in some form,
> website or hard copy is a great idea.  Psubs is probably as good a venue
as
> any . . . Hmmm, I'm getting a little long-winded, as usual . . Ray,the
> original idea of making  Frank's stuff available again strikes a
responsive
> chord in all parties, IMHO. But the soup-nazi approach of "you can't stop
> us", is sort of the opposite of that.
> Phil Nuytten
>