Hi.
I have read somewhere on this discussion board that Dempsey wrote a good book on Boxing, "Championship Fighting". I am wondering if the book "How to Fight Tough" is a complete reprint, or if there are any alterations to the original copy or its just a different book.
Thanks in advance.

Perhaps you can tell from this...

In "Championship Fighting" there are 25 Chapters titled as follows:

1. Explosives at Toledo
2. Good and Bad Toledo Aftermaths
3. Punchers Are Made; Not Born
4. Why I Wrote This Book
5. Differences Between Fist-Fighting and Boxing
6. You're the Kayo Kid
7. What Is a Punch?
8. The Falling Step
9. The Power Line
10. Relaying and Exploding
11. Stance
12. Footwork
13. Range
14. Straight Punching from the Whirl
15. Purity in Punching
16. Hooking
17. Uppercuts
18. Punch Ranks First
19. Your Sparmate
20. General Defense and Blocking
21. Deflection
22. Evasion
23. Feinting and Drawing
24. Training
25. How to Watch a Fight

Is this helpful?

"How to fight tough" is an handbook -now reprinted- that shows a very simple self-defense method that Dempsey created for the U.S Coast Guard during W.W.II. Interesting indeed, in the whole book there is only ONE punching technique. The method, no-nonsense kind of, in mostly based on jujitsu.
Is there anyone who can kindly indicate where to purchase "Championship fighting"?
Merci

Last we checked, "Championship Fighting" is still out of print. You might find copies if you search for used books. It is well worth the effort, Dempsey's book is the best book on punching I've ever seen.

"How to Fight Tough" is still in print.

European,

The last copyright date I have for Jack Dempsey's "Champion Fighting" is 1978. Its ISBN 0-913111-00-7 -- last published by Centerline Press, 7603 East Firestone, Suite 166, Downey, California 90241. You can check with them to see if anybody has renued the copyright to the text since '78 & if they have any plans to reprint it any time soon. Now, if this copyright hasn't been renued since 1978, then it's "public domain" by now. There's a 1983 copyright date in the book, but that's for the cover art (not "public domain" yet). Check it out.

I was just checking this out on Amazon.com

There are only used books being sold there and the going price is around $150. Some people are selling it for $200+. So if you have a copy of the book, it's definately a collector's item.

-crumbly

i've been trying to locate this too. mike, i don't know a lot about this, but if it's in public domain, does that mean some good soul could scan it on to a website? or not?

Wondering,

Yyyyyyep! It do mean that indeed. It means it can be photocopied, reprinted in full (without having to ask anyone's permission), put on the web, etc.
BUT, before you assume that it's public domain, check it out (as copyright-infringement penalties usually start at about $10,000.00 & go up). Now for private usage, where you're not going to make a profit (& your not going to distribute it to the public), you can copy it yourself.

$100-200? The last cover price was $8.95 (paperback)! Please, try a library or a friend before you seriously consider forking out such a large sum.

Now, (if my understanding is correct) any text can be quoted at length with reference to the text after 7 years from a copyright date; and if a copyright goes 20 years without renewal, then it's in the public domain. Private (non-profit) usage is an entirely different animal which is never an infringement (as the intent of the law was to keep others from making profit from text, art, film, & recordings that are the property of another). Note: the creator of a work isn't always the owner of the work's copyright (so don't just figure that if Jack Dempsey has been dead for "x" number of years, then...) -- check it out if you're interested.

Disclaimer: neither I (nor this Shen-Wu website -- if I may say so) are to be construed as legal advisors (or as giving absolutely correct legal advice) on any subject matter (hell, our constitutions aren't even followed these days, so who knows what "legal" is anymore anyway? Oh, yeah, "legal" is whatever those currently in power say it is... how could I forget?); so check things out for yourselves.

If this is true...I may feel really generous and scan my copy of the book and post it up in the shenwu virtual academy as a downloadable pdf file.

Or not...

I could be wrong, but I believe books have to be in print for 75 years before they become 'public domain.' If this is the case, Dempsy's book will not be public domain for a long time.

Yeah, I haven't personally researched "public domain"... what I wrote about "public domain" was hearsay from someone who says he knows (& he may or may not actually know -- you should know how that goes)... so I appologize for stating 20 years as fact (& that's why later I wrote "check it out" if you're interested). Also, rules do change -- so it may be 75, or 20, or whatever (should check on current trend/status). Eyz didunt rite a "disclaimer" fer nuttin'.

I haven't read the general copyright rules since about twelve years ago... & I don't recall reading anything about "public domain" at that time. I do know that such a thing called "public domain" exists. Also, different media may have different wait periods prior to becoming public domain (I recall some old motion-picture cartoons originally made in the thirties being reproduced as public domain in the eighties -- that's 50 years).

I'd be interested to know about books for certain myself, but I'm not going to do the research (at least not right now). Anybody?

http://www.brynmawr.edu/Acads/Langs/llc/copyright.htm

Under the same Act, the "Fair Use" exemption places a limit on these exclusive rights in order to promote free speech, learning, scholarly research and open discussion.
Public Domain- Works are copyrighted for only a period of time, roughly for the life of the author plus 50 years, but see the Public Domain Chart: http://www.bmb.com/ip/PubDomain.html

This is off the net...can't vouch for it; but if it's accurate, then I guess the book is still protected.

Thanks Wondering,

Yep. That's pretty much what I read around 1990 (this type of information was included in the US government's copyright forms package).

The only great snags for posting the entire book on-line are quantitative & distributional. On-line distribution is world-wide. Using the entire book is using all of the copyright owner's personal property -- his opinions & his expressiveness (in addition to any & all factual information therein).

Personal use is a factor in favor of copying this entire work privately, but it wouldn't be a factor for posting on a public discussion board.

The factors which support copying the entire work without permission on this board are: educational, discussive, non-profit, & the fact that the work has been out of print for a number of years; but the quantity & distribution could get one into hot water.

Safely, on this board, we can discuss all of the facts contained in this book for educational purposes, (since this board is a non-profit, educational discussion board) & we should be able to quote small amounts of Dempsey's expressive work (including his opinions -- but the book should also be referenced when doing so).

THE BEST NEWS is that Dempsey's book is loaded with facts. His opinions are interesting but unnecessary to understand his method of self-defense, er, offensive punching. It would take some doing, but someone could scan the book & edit out Dempsey's opinions & charts (replacing any charts with a discussion of their factual content) for posting on-line. Or, if one took more time, one could type all the facts out manually (or any select number of the facts) & post them on-line.

Note: should the work be scanned, the artwork must undergo at least a 10% change in appearance in order not to violate copyright rules (& that's a fact which I did research myself back in 1990 when I copyrighted some of my artwork). I've seen plenty of copyrighted material that was recognizable as coming from other copyrighted material (like simplified tracings of originals).

Just a cautionary note. This is sounding an awful lot like legal advice. FWIW

okay, I'm not as internet hip as the rest of you.

Does FWIW mean: From What I've Weawized?

It does seem like something to be cautious about.
If the copywright extends as the Bryn Mawr site suggests, it would seem that the book is still under copywright.

Correct -- I would err on the side of caution & assume that it is still copyright protected material, so I would keep a discussion of the book related to the facts within the book (unless wishing to critique -- but I see no need for that with Dempsey's material... it's good stuff). Facts (I'm reminded by reading that above-mentioned website) aren't considered intellectual or creative property -- they're fair game (anytime).

Again, Dempsey's book is full of facts & factual, how-to instruction (with both facts & opinions as to why things are the way they are). Strip away his opinion & you have plenty of factual material from which to learn from.

Because a book is copyright protected, it doesn't mean that every bit of it is under such protection. For instance, a book's title is never protected in any way (titles aren't copyrightable -- unless the rules have recently changed).

Note that one can't copyright an uppercut anymore than one can copyright instruction of how to do an uppercut. Now, within such instructions there can be some creative work that is copyright protected (such as an opinion or a make-believe story or chart used to help make some point about uppercuts).

I'll volunteer to type the facts within Dempsey's book -- a little at a time, daily or nearly so -- if Tim & SysOp want to make boardspace for this. I'll have to describe pictures in writing though as I don't have a scanner (I do have access to a "Photoshop" program which I'm fairly adept at using, so if I could get hold of downloaded pics I could give 'em that 10%-or-more change; Dempsey's book has some of the best illustrations I've seen in this genre).

Bottom line: I've got a copy & have nothing to gain (& I wouldn't risk copying that which I was uncertain of). My writing the facts of the book on this board would be for educational purposes & for the purpose of generating discussion(s) of an educational nature. To the best of my knowledge, neither Tim, nor the SysOp, nor I would make any profit from such an undertaking. I see no problem with this beyond boardspace.

Tim, I presume you are going to talk with your attorney before you do any of this. The folks have got the law quite screwed up. For example whether one makes a profit from stealing someone elses book is irrelevant. It is as absurd as saying you can go into a 7-11 and steal a six pack if you are going to give it away as "charity" to a skid row bum.

Also the fact/opinion "distinction" is screwed up.

Turning from the letter of the law to the "right or wrongness" of it. If the book is in the public domian go for it! I personaly would love to read that book on anyone's web site. And I promise to send a nice Taiwanese Christmas gift to anyone who takes the time to type it in. Really, no kidding.

However if in fact the book is not public domain, then it is theft...pure and simple. And trying to "work around" the fact that it is theft by saying "well we will just pick out the facts and post them" is in the Brian System of morals...not the right thing to do.

I write for a living. Words=money to me so I take seriously the idea that copyright should be protected both in the letter and in the spirit of the law.

Please note, I am not trying to "lecture" anyone on morals, ethics or the law. I lecture on the criminal law all week I have no desire to do it on the weekends. But I simply write this as someone who makes their living (such as it is)from words.

take care (and remember, no kidding about the wonderful "Taiwan X-Mas Gift"
Brian

Tim,

Again, if there's any doubt as to legality -- or even morality, then "just say 'No'" (I figured you would anyway due to boardspace considerations alone). BETTER YET, just skip it.*

Brian Kennedy,

I may be screwed up ('though I believe otherwise). I'll take it that you never considered Robin Hood as the hero of the story by the same title (likewise, some of this nations founding fathers stole some tea & distributed it to the fishes -- those villains). Nevertheless, I hadn't seen my suggestion as quite like your 6-pack analogy anyway. I thought of it more in line with really following both letter & spirit of the law. If the law wasn't meant to include the facts, then it would be away-from-the-law's-spirit to begin covering the facts with this law... this is how laws become the instrument of tyranny... & it happens a lot -- a fact you should be well aware of.

Laws these days are made by government(s) -- please correct me if I'm too far off the path. Laws are enforced by courts (to some extent). A court is (generally) an extention of government. Attorneys are considered as officers of the court.

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.”
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

Do the math.

To All,

* = I guess I'm a villain too. I won't write a long list of facts found in Dempsey's book. Instead, I'll discuss things -- things that may be facts from Dempsey's book. And if anybody is scared to exercise their right to free speech (which discussion of facts is), then by all means look away -- or stop me from posting. If you decide to stop me from posting, then do it quick, because otherwise I start my discussion of facts tomorrow.

Hey Mike

I had a problem with the print on my..err.. copy of the Jack Dempsey book.. it would be great if you could help fill in the bits where the ink has corrupted.... and since we both have the book there would be no legal problem in our discussing it

stc