On Oct 5, 7:13 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 5, 3:16 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:



I have just sent Thomson a certified letter requesting clarification
of the status of this title. It's extremely doubtful, but possible,
they may issue C&D to the servers offering it. If you want it,
on .pdf, DOWNLOAD IT NOW.

Thomson have nothing to do with the RDH4 copright; the thief Bret
Ludwig blowing smoke in your face. If you want to know why, come
follow the threads on RAT.

If they do, they won't bother anyone who has it if they don't
publicly distribute it. Copyright is challengeable if it exists at
all because it's been out for years and they did nothing.

But you will know you're a thief, won't you?

One can only steal what can be stolen, and only what is owned can be
stolen. No one owns RDH 4. Not Newnes, not Audio Amateur Productions,
not Thunderfunk Amps, not Thomson, and very certainly not Andrew McCoy
d/b/a Andre Jute.

If any one did own it they would have issued a C&D by now. They have
not because they do not. They will not because they can not. At the
very least they would have allowed free distribution only with
attribution, which they have not asked for.

You are a liar, a thief, a mountebank, and probably a mattoid,
Andrew.

This comes down to, "We stole it so often, it is now ours."

When will you write to the Newnes imprint of Reed-Elseviers, Bratzi,
to dob in that little list of copyright thieves?
cReed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd 1997

From Newnes at least you might get some kind of an answer. It could

even be more than just, Thanks, Dumbo, but we know.

Unsigned out of contempt for a fool and a thief


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).

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.

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.

The book is a work for hire from a company that no longer exists in
any tangible form. 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. Andre's opinions not withstanding are
irrelevant.

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. It is very difficult for third parties to
license old books in most cases because tracking down everyone is a
hassle and because most publishing houses in New York refuse to talk
to anyone without a lot of money-they just can't be bothered.

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.

On 6 Oct, 04:34, Bret Ludwig wrote:
]

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.


So, he camps with Arny. It also explains the state
of Arny's bushes. And they are brown bears, not Koalas.

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