[thenomad]

I suspect I'm one of the few readers here (@cstross being another) for whom this is genuinely important professional information. And it's fantastic.

Sadly no mention of license there, though - kinda vital if one is intending to use some of the imagery in remix works - although given the texts are thoroughly out of copyright I'd assume that's not too big an issue.

[racer-v]

This is probably correct. Scans of public domain works which are "slavish copies" containing "no spark of originality" were ruled public domain in Bridgeman Art Library vs Corel.

http://www.likelihoodofconfusion.com/who-owns-the-copyright-...

[mylons]

care to expound on your profession? edit: click their username to read about their profession

[oh_sigh]

What kind of work do you do on the occult?

[richmarr]

How did you think AI works?

[TheOtherHobbes]

That depends if you're the AI or the developer.

[ComputerGuru]

Or the media.

[rosser]

IANAL, but yeah: shouldn't these works not be under copyright, just on the basis of their age? Wouldn't the "phone book" doctrine apply here, also? There's no creative authorship in a collection of previous works.

[jmh117]

I would love to see some of this in your work! Great stuff!

[flycaliguy]

I bet that shirtless youtuber is excited as well.