CFC Bulletin 1973 Nov-Dec No.1

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

From the old thread


I would think more value would be had by scanning all of the previous year's chess magazines.

Ok. I'll do the first one, you'll take rest :D
https://docs.google.com/viewer?pid=explorer&srcid=0B1kCx1YOANRgOWQ2MTkzY2EtNTAzMi00YTMzLTliZjE tYTQ5ZDI1NTkwMmMz&chrome=true&docid=4ad6b96cf650c82de32c9280f3e1ee73|0ea502ec69f 9897cf9538f0393fa9520&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=400

A whole bulletin @ https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B1kCx1YOANRgOWQ2MTkzY2EtNTAzMi00YTMzLTliZ jEtYTQ5ZDI1NTkwMmMz

Your move :)

[Jonathan Berry]

Nice job of scanning and packaging, Egis. A pp. 38 + iv magazine in only 3.6 MB. I'll leave copyright considerations to others. I am not a lawyer, but it is my impression that if the CFC publishes the magazines--the entire magazines, not excerpts--in digital format, it might avoid the fate of the publishers in the case of Heather Robertson versus Thomson et al. Your putting each issue of the mag in its own file seems ideal from that point of view. This is not legal advice. IANAL.

I have about a dozen CFC mags, complete, scanned, but not in so handy a format. AFAIR, they are in multiple jpg's. Also, the text near the spine is more distorted, because the magazines have been bound year-by-year.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Nice job of scanning and packaging

Thnx.

It lacks the OCR as it would provide a search possibility instead of browsing and looking for e.g. J.Berry's articles :)

While text cleaned nicely, pictures are not so good. I forget a trick to use a black sheet of a paper to minimize effects of the paper transparency.

[Fred McKim]

Thnx.

It lacks the OCR as it would provide a search possibility instead of browsing and looking for e.g. J.Berry's articles :)

While text cleaned nicely, pictures are not so good. I forget a trick to use a black sheet of a paper to minimize effects of the paper transparency.

Very nice job. I would love to put it on the web site, but as Jonathan says the copyright laws are beyond my area of expertise. Several people have suggested that we can't simply slap these up on the web site.

I'll contact Les Bunning and see if he has an opinion.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

I'll contact Les Bunning and see if he has an opinion.

He is a biased person - the manager/editor (probably a writer for many articles) of the CFC at that time :D

[Peter McKillop]

He is a biased person - the manager/editor (probably a writer for many articles) of the CFC at that time :D

You have forgotten that biases and conflicts of interest don't exist within the CFC family. :D

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Peter:

I'm pleased that you recognize that we are a " family ", and not a team, collective, corporation, entity, etc.!!

Bob A

[Les Bunning]

The first CFC magazine which I edited was reissued because the French articles were gramatically poor and had numerous typos. I have no objections to the reissued version being published
Les Bunning

[Jonathan Berry]

The first CFC magazine which I edited was reissued because the French articles were gramatically poor and had numerous typos. I have no objections to the reissued version being published
Les BunningThat's interesting! Readers who are really really old may remember that in September 1975 I succeeded Les Bunning as Business Manager of the CFC. While there were some extra copies of the twelve issues of CFC Bulletin (I initially typed Bulleting, LOL !) which Les had edited, there were several boxes of issue #1. All this time, I had assumed that the extra copies were printed with an eye to having samples on hand to promote the CFC. I do remember Les referring to bad translation, but I had not connected the two. The question is: how does a person, who maybe doesn't speak French, distinguish between the First Edition and the Revised First Edition?

The CFC, the Editor, and the authors of the articles would each have copyright interest in the material. From the context of Les's message, I'd have to guess that he is writing as Editor of that issue, not giving a legal opinion. As referred to above, the judge made specific comments about the nature of electronic republication in the case Heather Robertson vs. Thomson et al. Thomson's expensive lawyers turned out to be wrong, though it cost the companies only $11 million compared to the (optimistic?) $100 million or so of the original suit.

Stuff is scanned and distributed electronically all the time, and Google is doing it systematically for profit, so people might not think the matter is important. However, if the CFC is within its legal rights to electronically (re-) publish complete back issues of its magazine, why not nail that down?

[Fred McKim]

He is a biased person - the manager/editor (probably a writer for many articles) of the CFC at that time :D

Les is willing to send you the corrected version if you are interested in rescanning.

[Fred McKim]

That's interesting! Readers who are really really old may remember that in September 1975 I succeeded Les Bunning as Business Manager of the CFC. While there were some extra copies of the twelve issues of CFC Bulletin (I initially typed Bulleting, LOL !) which Les had edited, there were several boxes of issue #1. All this time, I had assumed that the extra copies were printed with an eye to having samples on hand to promote the CFC. I do remember Les referring to bad translation, but I had not connected the two. The question is: how does a person, who maybe doesn't speak French, distinguish between the First Edition and the Revised First Edition?

The CFC, the Editor, and the authors of the articles would each have copyright interest in the material. From the context of Les's message, I'd have to guess that he is writing as Editor of that issue, not giving a legal opinion. As referred to above, the judge made specific comments about the nature of electronic republication in the case Heather Robertson vs. Thomson et al. Thomson's expensive lawyers turned out to be wrong, though it cost the companies only $11 million compared to the (optimistic?) $100 million or so of the original suit.

Stuff is scanned and distributed electronically all the time, and Google is doing it systematically for profit, so people might not think the matter is important. However, if the CFC is within its legal rights to electronically (re-) publish complete back issues of its magazine, why not nail that down?

OK. That makes me really really old, then. Maybe Les can let us know if the CFC members of the day got the corrected version. Maybe we've been selling those incorrect versions to people who have ordered magazines to complete their collections, over the years.

I think we'd be OK to put Issue 1 of the CFC Bulletin on the website, as a sample, but you're probably right that we'd need a real informed legal opinion before we started on a mass "publishing".

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Les is willing to send you the corrected version if you are interested in rescanning.

Thus my copy is really the first issue, isn't it? :D

As for the rescan - Did it have changes in the English part? Maybe only redone French pages would be enough?

Just a matter of a fact - the scanned title page has a different color (hue) than the original :rolleyes:

[Jonathan Berry]

OK. That makes me really really old, then. Maybe Les can let us know if the CFC members of the day got the corrected version. Maybe we've been selling those incorrect versions to people who have ordered magazines to complete their collections, over the years.

I think we'd be OK to put Issue 1 of the CFC Bulletin on the website, as a sample, but you're probably right that we'd need a real informed legal opinion before we started on a mass "publishing".Yep, we're ooooooooooold. Really.

If it were me, and I'm not a lawyer, I'd read the judge's written decision in Heather Robertson vs. Thomson and move along from there. AFAIR, it's in surprisingly plain English.

Egis, the copy of #1 in my collection seems to be identical to the one you scanned. Whether it was the one I received through the mail, or taken from the boxes of that issue still around in 1975-84, I don't know, but if I had to guess, I'd say "box".

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Les is willing to send you the corrected version if you are interested in rescanning.

I forgot to answer the request: I could rescan without rush (2 months or longer). Contact if it is fine and you need my mailing address.

[Les Bunning]

The corrected version was distibuted primarily in Quebec. In those days producing a magazine was much more cumbersome than today. It was typed on an IBM selectric . The text was then taped or glued to a page as camera ready copy. The printer produced a copy of the final version for approval and upon approval printed the number of copies ordered. The printing process took about 2 weeks. The first edition was larger than subsequent editions. The magazine improved in quality over the 2 years that I produced it. For me it was only a part time job. As the first Business manager I did the ratings-manually in those days- and started book and equipment sales. The position rapidly became too time consuming for me to do part time and so I resigned asnd Jonathan Berry became the first Full time Business Manager. The magazine(then called the CFC bulletin) continued to improve in quality under Jonathan Berry's editorship.
Les Bunning