On Oct 5, 7:34 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
You are quite a character! You claim the book is owned by Newnes yet
you claim it was stolen from YOU. Your "facts" just do not add up.

If it was indeed copyright the owner would have removed it by now ( if
they even cared).

Very precisely.

This is the same old story twice: "We stole it so often, it is now
ours."

Then the thief Bret Ludwig, who has never seen the inside of a
publisher and never will, sets himself up as an "expert" on publishing
house practice, starting with a paranoid daydream absolutely typical
of his fascist mentality:

Companies like Newnes guard their property very well. They have full
time infringement monitoring and attorneys on retainer in every
country in the world worth bothering with. Anyone doubting that need
only put up a scanned book that IS copyright and they will find out.

Actually, small publishing houses, and large ones, have rather small
staffs fully occupied with editing and selling books. Copyright
infringement in a civilized society is so rare, and the sort of
concerted theft that the thief Bret Ludwig pimps for so very rare,
that nobody pays much attention to copyright theft, not even the
rights manager, whose function is to license rights to other
territories, for translation, and for other media, not in the first
instance to enforce copyright compliance.

The book is a work for hire from a company

That's a lie. It has been explained again and again that this is an
Australian book and that Australian books created by employees are
protected *everywhere in the world* for the life of the author plus 70
full years.

that no longer exists in
any tangible form.

This is an implied lie: Bratzi tries to claim the property dies with
the property owner. Actually, the copyright survives to to the full
term and may be, and in this case was, transferred to a new owner:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

Like most of the classic RCA and GE tube manuals
and educational materials published before about 1962-64 the copyright
was not renewed at the time and because of US law and laws elsewhere
is effectively out of copyright.

This is a whole bunch of lies and ignorant statements compounded. For
a start, we're not talking about the US, we're talking about the
thieves Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic who stole in Canada
the RDH4, and claim the protection of Canadian law (which they
deliberately lie about) for their theft. I'll get to the USA thefts
later if their posters don't in the meanwhile take them down.

Andre's opinions not withstanding are
irrelevant.

This is a double negative from a semi-literate solder sniffer trying
to sound sophisticated. What do you mean to say, Bratzi?

Surely, since I am the only one here who actually knows anything about
copyright, courtesy of having earned my living by copyright for half a
century, my knowledge and opinions are the most relevant?

The fact that the book was reprinted is irrelevant. In fact, I
suspect Newnes never would have bothered reprinting it if it were
subject to copyright.

Holy Moses! And this scumball Bret Ludwig holds himself up as a
copyright expert! Yo, moron, Newnes reprinted exactly *because* they
owned the copyright:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

It is very difficult for third parties to
license old books in most cases because tracking down everyone is a
hassle

For you, the thief Bret Ludwig, of course it is impossible, because
you don't know who to approach and how to approach them. Newnes and
other publishers do this every day for a living. For them it is no
bother at all.

But, in any event "license" in your mouth is a lie. You're not on
about licensing copyright for payment, you're just a thief and a pimp
for thieves, in this case the thieves Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky
Prodanovic, and their mirrors.

and because most publishing houses in New York refuse to talk
to anyone without a lot of money-they just can't be bothered.

Yet another lie. Most copyright licensing deals are for a few thousand
dollars. Many, many translation rights, especially in novels are
licensed for a few hundred dollars. Bret Ludwig doesn't know what he
is talking about. It is all of a piece with his paranoid misconception
of the world: little Bret against the monster publishing houses. I've
worked with all the largest publishing houses in the world, and many
of the smaller ones, and they're just people like everyone else.

Andre(w) is a liar, a mountebank, and a ****head. It's likely he
molests koala bears and craps in his neighbors' hydrangea bushes as
well, but this as yet unproven.

These are more lies. But what does one expect from Bret Ludwig, who
steals from the living and the dead and brags about it?

Andre Jute
You can find out how I know so much about copyright by visiting my
books at
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/

This is an implied lie: Bratzi tries to claim the property dies with
the property owner. Actually, the copyright survives to to the full
term and may be, and in this case was, transferred to a new owner:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

Like most of the classic RCA and GE tube manuals
and educational materials published before about 1962-64 the copyright
was not renewed at the time and because of US law and laws elsewhere
is effectively out of copyright.

This is a whole bunch of lies and ignorant statements compounded. For
a start, we're not talking about the US, we're talking about the
thieves Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic who stole in Canada
the RDH4, and claim the protection of Canadian law (which they
deliberately lie about) for their theft. I'll get to the USA thefts
later if their posters don't in the meanwhile take them down.

Andre's opinions not withstanding are
irrelevant.

This is a double negative from a semi-literate solder sniffer trying
to sound sophisticated. What do you mean to say, Bratzi?

Surely, since I am the only one here who actually knows anything about
copyright, courtesy of having earned my living by copyright for half a
century, my knowledge and opinions are the most relevant?

The fact that the book was reprinted is irrelevant. In fact, I
suspect Newnes never would have bothered reprinting it if it were
subject to copyright.

Holy Moses! And this scumball Bret Ludwig holds himself up as a
copyright expert! Yo, moron, Newnes reprinted exactly *because* they
owned the copyright:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997


They owned the same "copyright" that Lindsay Publications owns on all
the out of copyright books that they reprint: that additional or
changed material they have added, or if they have edited or deleted
things the exact things they have edited or deleted. Anyone else
besides Lindsay Publications may do the same thing Lindsay has done,
reprint a book in the public domain. They cannot add, for example,
Lindsay's foreword or addenda he puts in.

Even a King James Bible has a copyright statement: they are seeking
to protect the formatting and extra materials such as maps they put
in. Although some do not even bother anymore with that.

Believe me, Newnes knows a great deal more than either of us about
copyright and copyright enforcement and they would have long ago put
the kibosh on these sites if it were improper.

On Oct 6, 3:51 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
This is an implied lie: Bratzi tries to claim the property dies with
the property owner. Actually, the copyright survives to to the full
term and may be, and in this case was, transferred to a new owner:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

Like most of the classic RCA and GE tube manuals
and educational materials published before about 1962-64 the copyright
was not renewed at the time and because of US law and laws elsewhere
is effectively out of copyright.

This is a whole bunch of lies and ignorant statements compounded. For
a start, we're not talking about the US, we're talking about the
thieves Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic who stole in Canada
the RDH4, and claim the protection of Canadian law (which they
deliberately lie about) for their theft. I'll get to the USA thefts
later if their posters don't in the meanwhile take them down.

Andre's opinions not withstanding are
irrelevant.

This is a double negative from a semi-literate solder sniffer trying
to sound sophisticated. What do you mean to say, Bratzi?

Surely, since I am the only one here who actually knows anything about
copyright, courtesy of having earned my living by copyright for half a
century, my knowledge and opinions are the most relevant?

The fact that the book was reprinted is irrelevant. In fact, I
suspect Newnes never would have bothered reprinting it if it were
subject to copyright.

Holy Moses! And this scumball Bret Ludwig holds himself up as a
copyright expert! Yo, moron, Newnes reprinted exactly *because* they
owned the copyright:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997


They owned the same "copyright" that Lindsay Publications owns on all
the out of copyright books that they reprint:

Then you, Bret Ludwig, or the thieves Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky
Prodanovic, or the thieves who operate their mirrors, must prove that
70 years have elapsed since the death of the last author of the RDH4.

That is clearly impossible for a book published as recently as 1953,
with a revised and expanded edition published possibly as late as 1967
creating yet another of authors and copyrights.

You're wanking hysterically, Ludwig:

that additional or
changed material they have added, or if they have edited or deleted
things the exact things they have edited or deleted.

Are you blowing smoke, Ludwig, or are you growing incoherent in your
hysteria? The Newnes edition of 1997 is a facsimile edition of the
last, 1967 edition under the old copyright holder AWV. Nothing has
been added or subtracted. All that has happened is that the copyright
passed from AWV to Reed, mother company of Newnes. Copyright, for your
information, isn't a magical incantation, it is just property, exactly
like an amplifier or real estate.

Anyone else
besides Lindsay Publications may do the same thing Lindsay has done,
reprint a book in the public domain.

Once the book is in the public domain, sure. But the RDH4 cannot even
begin to come into the public domain until 2014 at the very earliest
(if all the authors were dead at publication, which we know isn't so
because there were revised and expanded editions after that) and most
probably until 2038.

Assertion doesn't put a book in the public domain, Ludwig: proof is
required, and you haven't even tried to get the necessary proof.

They cannot add, for example,
Lindsay's foreword or addenda he puts in.

What has Lindsay got to do with the RDH4? Are you drunk or doped up
again, Ludwig?

Even a King James Bible has a copyright statement: they are seeking
to protect the formatting and extra materials such as maps they put
in. Although some do not even bother anymore with that.

Everyone knows the writers of the King James Bible are dead for
several centuries now. You, Bret Ludwig, and the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic have yet to prove the authors of the
RDH4 are dead, and have been dead for 70 years. You can't, because
only forty years has passed since the last revised and expanded
edition of the RDH4. Tough luck, sonny.

Believe me, Newnes knows a great deal more than either of us about
copyright and copyright enforcement

They certainly know more than you do, Ludwig, because you know
nothing, as is illustrated by your mantra:

and they would have long ago put
the kibosh on these sites if it were improper.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

Unsigned out of contempt for thief and a pimp for thieves

Everyone knows the writers of the King James Bible are dead for
several centuries now. You, Bret Ludwig, and the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic have yet to prove the authors of the
RDH4 are dead, and have been dead for 70 years. You can't, because
only forty years has passed since the last revised and expanded
edition of the RDH4. Tough luck, sonny.

Believe me, Newnes knows a great deal more than either of us about
copyright and copyright enforcement

They certainly know more than you do, Ludwig, because you know
nothing, as is illustrated by your mantra:

and they would have long ago put
the kibosh on these sites if it were improper.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

It isn't anyone's. If it were they would have stopped it. It's quite
that simple.

"RDH 4 may be distributed free of charge, as has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt. "

So go and eat ****, you puke-eating cur, you sniffer of bicycle seats
and tampon applicators found outdoors.

On Oct 6, 9:04 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
Everyone knows the writers of the King James Bible are dead for
several centuries now. You, Bret Ludwig, and the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic have yet to prove the authors of the
RDH4 are dead, and have been dead for 70 years. You can't, because
only forty years has passed since the last revised and expanded
edition of the RDH4. Tough luck, sonny.

Believe me, Newnes knows a great deal more than either of us about
copyright and copyright enforcement

They certainly know more than you do, Ludwig, because you know
nothing, as is illustrated by your mantra:

and they would have long ago put
the kibosh on these sites if it were improper.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

It isn't anyone's.
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

If it were they would have stopped it. It's quite
that simple.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

You flatter yourself, Ludwig, and you flatter the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic. Until someone tells them, it is
doubtful a publisher will discover some mickey mouse person on his
mickey mouse netsite offers the publisher's copyright property for
download.

"RDH 4 may be distributed free of charge, as has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt. "

Bull****. It is in copyright, and the copyright owner is identifiable
and has been identified:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

So go and eat ****, you puke-eating cur, you sniffer of bicycle seats
and tampon applicators found outdoors.

Even you abuse is dull, Ludwig. You really aren't suited for
intellectual enterprise. You should stick to shooting at cans and
sniffing solder fumes.

Unsigned for the usual reasons

On Oct 7, 12:03 am, Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 6, 9:04 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:

Everyone knows the writers of the King James Bible are dead for
several centuries now. You, Bret Ludwig, and the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic have yet to prove the authors of the
RDH4 are dead, and have been dead for 70 years. You can't, because
only forty years has passed since the last revised and expanded
edition of the RDH4. Tough luck, sonny.

Believe me, Newnes knows a great deal more than either of us about
copyright and copyright enforcement

They certainly know more than you do, Ludwig, because you know
nothing, as is illustrated by your mantra:

and they would have long ago put
the kibosh on these sites if it were improper.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

It isn't anyone's.

cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

If it were they would have stopped it. It's quite
that simple.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

You flatter yourself, Ludwig, and you flatter the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic. Until someone tells them, it is
doubtful a publisher will discover some mickey mouse person on his
mickey mouse netsite offers the publisher's copyright property for
download.

They have been notified. If you don't believe me, notify them
yourself.





"RDH 4 may be distributed free of charge, as has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt. "

Bull****. It is in copyright, and the copyright owner is identifiable
and has been identified:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997


Let them issue a ceast and desist then. They won't.

They can't.

On Oct 6, 10:21 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
On Oct 7, 12:03 am, Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 6, 9:04 pm, Bret Ludwig
It isn't anyone's.

cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

If it were they would have stopped it. It's quite
that simple.

"We have stolen the book so often, it is now ours."

You flatter yourself, Ludwig, and you flatter the thieves Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic. Until someone tells them, it is
doubtful a publisher will discover some mickey mouse person on his
mickey mouse netsite offers the publisher's copyright property for
download.

They have been notified. If you don't believe me, notify them
yourself.

Me? I'm not a grass. I leave it to criminals like you, Ludwig, to dob
in the other criminals, like Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic.

But I don't believe you. I still want to see the e-mail you sent,
complete if you don't mind, so that I can determine whether you did
the job at all, and if your did do it, and if you did do it, did yo do
it right.

"RDH 4 may be distributed free of charge, as has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt. "

Bull****. It is in copyright, and the copyright owner is identifiable
and has been identified:
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

Let them issue a ceast and desist then. They won't.

Oh dear. You really are a slow learner. These are the facts:

1. The copyright holder is the copyright holder by presumption. They
don't have to prove anything. You, the thief Bret Ludwig, have to
prove that the book is in the public domain. That is the law.

2. They don't have to tell you anything, not even a cease and desist
order. That is the law. You're a nobody; you have no standing; you're
just another thief.

3. You can't conclude anything from the absence of a cease and desist
order. You will still be a thief, and so will Gregg, Tim Williams and
Choky.

They can't.

4. The law is that the wannabes like you must prove they are not
thieves. The copyright holder has to do nothing, absolutely nothing,
SFFA. That too is the law.

You've made a fool of yourself, Ludwig, for no gain at all.

You've made a fool of yourself because you are out of your depth,
Ludwig. I have explained several times how this works but you have
either failed to understand or you are such a jerkup that you think
your wishful thinking substitutes for the law of the land. (That last
is a good definition of a sociopath.)

Unsigned out of contempt for a tattletale and a fool

They have been notified. If you don't believe me, notify them
yourself.

Me? I'm not a grass. I leave it to criminals like you, Ludwig, to dob
in the other criminals, like Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic.

But I don't believe you. I still want to see the e-mail you sent,
complete if you don't mind, so that I can determine whether you did
the job at all, and if your did do it, and if you did do it, did yo do
it right.

You're a moral idiot.

There is no fault in notifying the authorities of a crime provided
you yourself were not in on the crime. It's when a co-conspirator rats
out his fellows that one can be called a snitch. Would you ignore the
robbing of an old lady on the street so as not to be a "grass"?

And no, I will not post the email. If you are so big on doing the job
why not wrote from all the sockpuppet accounts you post here on when
you are having a bad period?

On Oct 6, 11:05 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
They have been notified. If you don't believe me, notify them
yourself.

Me? I'm not a grass. I leave it to criminals like you, Ludwig, to dob
in the other criminals, like Gregg, Tim Williams and Choky Prodanovic.

But I don't believe you. I still want to see the e-mail you sent,
complete if you don't mind, so that I can determine whether you did
the job at all, and if your did do it, and if you did do it, did yo do
it right.

You're a moral idiot.

Anything is possible, of course. But it is a proven fact that you,
Bret Ludwig is an immoral thief. The only thing shorter than your
decency is your dick.

There is no fault in notifying the authorities of a crime provided
you yourself were not in on the crime. It's when a co-conspirator rats
out his fellows that one can be called a snitch. Would you ignore the
robbing of an old lady on the street so as not to be a "grass"?

Of course not, nor the theft of the RDH4 copyright by Gregg, Tim
Williams and Choky Prodanovic, with Bret Ludwig as their tout. Nor,
for that matter, the theft from me by the scumball Bret Ludwig.

And no, I will not post the email. If you are so big on doing the job

It is not that I want to do the job, it is that I want to check you
didn't deliberately send the e-mail to the wrong address. We know you
are dishonest, a thief in fact, so why should we take your word for
anything.

why not wrote from all the sockpuppet accounts you post here on when
you are having a bad period?

Unsigned out of contempt for a snitch and scum

wrote in message


Australian law says that when an employee creates a book, the employer
owns it. The term of the copyright for such a corporate copyright
under Australian law is for the *author's life plus 70 years from the
year after his death*. Since first publication was 1953, with revised
and expanded editions following until 1967, the RDH4 cannot even begin
to go out of copyright before at least 2024 and possibly not even
until 2038.

This is such a profoundly stupid complaint you have, Mr. McJute.

Let's assume that the copyright *IS* still owned by RDH4, or whoever you
THINK owns it.

In order to enforce their copyright, they would have to engage in legal
actions. This would normally start with a "cease and desist" letter. For
any publishing company, this would require at least a meeting between
attorney and probably several management level employees, the lawyer would
then go off and research the issue, and write the C&D. This would then be
forwarded back the the client; they would circulate the draft among the
management employees and likely have at least minor changes to the form and
substance of the letter. The attorney would rewrite, and assuming all goes
well receive approval from the client to issue it.

The attorney would then need to locate the exact details of the owner of the
website in question (and from what I gather this material is routinely
available from a number of websites). Research would be done and perhaps at
long last the C&D would be sent, probably by some kind of signed courier.

Total cost? Easily US$5000, perhaps up to US$10,000.

MORE THAN ANY ROYALTIES BEING RECEIVED BY RDH4 FOR THIS COPYRIGHT!

What you don't seem to understand about business, Mr. McJute is that these
kinds of management decisions are made by experienced business people every
day of the week. They are decisions based on sound business practice and
not "vanity". You've clearly published several "vanity" editions of
so-called novels, and rightly believe that you should enforce your copyright
to this drivel. That's your right, and you might actually prevail (there
being no evidence that even with the miniscule cost of digital storage, no
one has yet seen any purpose to steal your vanity books).

There would be no business sense for RDH4 to enforce such a copyright, even
if they are the owner. The demand for these publications is near zero -
they are antiquated reference books at best and I would guess many libraries
that might have a copy would be in the process of getting rid of it, as
libraries routinely do with out-of-date scientific publications.

Many in fact would agree that digital availability for books of this type is
a public service, that these volumes have actually been liberated from their
lack of circulation.

You're apparently one of them anal-retentive troglidytes