Talk:Scouting for Boys

Copyright Status

This article would benefit from a section on the status of copyright in this book. As this book was first published in 1908, prior to the Berne Convention, it would at first sight seem to be in the Public domain. However, Project Gutenberg does not list this book, and I suspect that another part of copyright law is preventing it from entering the public domain (recency of death of the author? Perpetual copyright of the scouting movement?). Please can someone add a brief note to the article, clarifying the copyright status of "Scouting for Boys"? Andrew Oakley 10:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

• Excellent recommendation: the copyright status is indeed an interesting issue, as I understand the rights were waived by B-P in the case of the BSA, and nothing to speak of in the case of the UK where most profit went to the publisher anyhow. And that for a book that has sold hundreds of millions of copies.... I'll work on a section regarding this. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC).
• Here is the UK Scout Association's statement on this. (Comment added by user at 62.84.167.168 on 20 June)
• Done. Answer is that the SA owns copyright today, and book will enter Public Domain in 2011, 70 years after BP's death. Section added to article, with reference. Thanks all. Andrew Oakley 15:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the startup. There's historically interesting info to add: Baden-Powell gave the BSA (the real one) very simply copying rights for the book, without stipulating money. Since that day the BSA can publish their own version. And the British copyright didn't bring money from Pearson's either: B-P lived and died a poor man, money-wise that is. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 17:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC).
  • I think you will find that copyright extends to the end of the 70th anniversary year. Hence the book will enter the public domain on 1 Jan 2012.
    • Good point, but the SA itself says in this PDF [1] that the book will enter the public domain in 2011. I totally see your point, I think the SA is about as authoratative as we're going to get though. Andrew Oakley 15:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I agree that the SA do not make this clear either, but some of your readers might infer that copyright ends on 8 Jan rather than 31 Dec (see for example [2]).
      • Additional info: the SA's rights are dated 1908 (obviously), but the BSA's rights are dated 1911. We ought to put this IN the article, well referenced. PS. I read the refs here as showing that copyrights for B-P's books end on 2011-12-31. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC).

BBC Article on The Book

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6918066.stm, Provides a nice picture of the book. I think we should incorporate some of it. Balfron 00:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• I edited the ref into it. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

Best seller

Scouting for Boys does not appear on List of best-selling books; this list appears to better documented than just about every best-seller list I have seen. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Realistic estimates of the world number copies sold is never written out, not even by Jeal. A reasonable estimate would be 100 to 200 millions, which I just added to the article. I'll see whether I can put this in the list. Wim van Dorst (talk) 23:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC).
• I made it number 9. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC).
• Assessing number 8 (without any refs), I made it number 8. I do think the numbers of 100-200M for SfB are serious, so I don't want move it higher into the list, although I highly doubt some of entries in the list. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC).

Thanks. I will have to look at Jeal again on that. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 01:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Page 396 (did that). Wim van Dorst (talk) 23:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC).

• I think your sales figures are a little high. If we accept 4 million for the UK, the majority of which were sold in the first 60 years (when it was the standard training text). According to the UK SA figures [3], the UK membership represented between 1/5 and 1/10 of the world membership in that period. A simple multiplication would give 20 to 40 million. Also the early introduction of the Boy Scout Handbook in the USA, would have significantly reduced sales of SfB there. - User:Khoomei
  • Hi Khoomei, yes, the ballpark of 200 million is indeed high. However, as the UK membership was definitely less than 1/10 (recent data gets it down to 1/40th), I used the 25+ ratio, getting an 'over 100 million'. Getting it down to to 100-150 million would put it more precisely. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC).
  • Hi Wim. My point is that during the period when the book was selling in large numbers in the UK, on average, the UK membership really did represent about 1/10 of world membership (it passed that figure around 1950 [4]). Since the 1960s, UK sales have been small, and much of the world membership growth has been in SE Asia and the Indian sub-continent. So, in the last 40-50 years, has the book been selling in proportionally large quantities in these areas?

User:Khoomei —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.32.238 (talk) 21:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• According to the World Bureau [5] SfB has been translated into 87 languages. - User:Khoomei —Preceding comment was added at 22:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Noted. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC).

Link to a full text somewhere on the internet

• Full on-line text of Scouting for Boys by The Dump, resources for Scouting

I have removed the above link from the article, as this is a blatant copyright infringement, which IMHO should not be part of the Wikipedia article. How do other editors see this? Wim van Dorst (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC).

Is it a blatant copyright infringement? The site says in its introduction: "To the best of our knowledge all of the texts on this site are in the Public Domain. Should you become aware of any material on this site that is under copyright, please advise the webmaster immediately, so that we may remove it or negotiate a licence to distribute it". --Bduke (Discussion) 21:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

As the work was published before 1923, it is now public domain in the US. See [[WP:PD}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 21:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Addition of ISBN from Wikidata

Please note that this article's infobox is retrieving an ISBN from Wikidata currently. This is the result of a change made to {{Infobox book}} as a result of this RfC. It would be appreciated if an editor took some time to review this ISBN to ensure it is appropriate for the infobox. If it is not, you could consider either correcting the ISBN on Wikidata (preferred) or introducing a blank ISBN parameter in the infobox to block the retrieval from Wikidata. If you do review the ISBN, please respond here so other editors don't duplicate your work. This is an automated message to address concerns that this change did not show up on watchlists. ~ Rob^Talk 01:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Is Scouting for boys one book or many different books?

Should this article be limited to the 1908 book, editions by Baden-Powell or all books under the title including later "editions" (really different books by different authors merely incorporating some of the earlier book contents). Many "editions" were put out under different subtitles. Even the original serialized fortnightly parts varied in title from the later 1908 book. Given the huge variety of content and authors, should it be viewed as a series rather than a book? The article does not even acknowledge these differences let alone deal with the implications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.162 (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2016 (UTC)