Clarification/confimation needed - "series" in series name

[Asteropê]

Hello!

I noticed a series with a Librarian note that puzzled me and wanted to get clarification.

The series is listed here:
https://www.goodreads.com/series/166834

My understanding of series naming policy was to not add "series" to the series name. So if it Amazon listed it as "Blackout series, book 1" you'd just write it as "Blackout, #1"

But this series is: "The Elemental Series"
I was going to remove the "series" from the series name, but then saw a Librarian note that stated:

"Please stop changing the series name. The author has named the series "The Elemental Series" and has copyrighted it. There is another series called just "Elemental" so every time you change this one, you are infringing on the copyrights of both authors."

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me. There are countless books with the exact same title and countless series with the same name, they're not infringing on the copyrights of each other! The series is a common word, not something unique like "Sarah Sue's Totally Amazing Adventures."
I don't see why removing the word series would be infringing on anyone's copyrights.

I saw in the change log that these books were just "Book title (Elemental, #x) - but then this one Librarian came in and changed them and added the notes.

Because I see this is not done by a Super Librarian or staff and because people could be mistaken, I wanted to ask if this is current and inline with proper policy and formatting.

Does the "Series" stay? Can it be removed?
If a series shares the same name as another series, is this the proper format/policy for dealing with it?

Thanks!

[Sandra]

I agree with you Asteropê. You can't copyright such a common phrase and exclude anyone else from using it.

And policy as far as I know was to remove Series, I always do.

I've got quite a few of that author's books on my shelves and I've never noticed any problems.

I've got plenty of books & series with the same name, none of which are copyrighted. LOL.

Be interested to see what others think :)

[Krazykiwi]

I remove it if I'm already editing the series for some reason, but I don't make a point. I have never seen a policy or instructions in this group to do so (which doesn't mean it's never happened), but the examples, and precedent imply that the best choice is to remove the "series" part.

However you can't copyright a series title or indeed any title. See circular 34 here from the US Copyright office: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/ helpfully titled
"Copyright Protection Not Available for Names, Titles, or Short Phrases" if you'd like to prove the point to her.

She could have trademarked a title but a) that's unlikely to be accepted with such a generic word, and b) it would be indicated with the (tm) symbol every time it appears, including on the covers - a requirement of holding a trademark is that you defend it. So whoever wrote that note is at best woefully misinformed.

In the end though, some authors just aren't worth the trouble of dealing with, especially if they have a pet librarian or two who does everything they ask without any regard to policy and will undo all your edits and leave rabid librarian notes behind. (I didn't look at the changelogs to see if that's the situation here, but it certainly sounds that way.) With those authors, if I'm absolutely sure it's a policy question, I just write a note to staff using the help contact form, and explain what I'm having trouble with.

[Sandra]

Yeah, I only take out series if I'm already editing, I don't go looking for it, but it seems to be out there a lot.

I had a look at the changelog and the librarian in Q only had the one edit which was 'the statement', though another librarian did a few changes. Not sure whether the author had any involvement .....

Probably not worth the hassle .....

[Paula]

I flagged a number of changes / issues with this a few weeks ago, there is a long history with those edits and I would just flag them again and leave for Support to deal with

[Emy]

While agreeing with Paula, I'd add in a separate comment away from this specific series.

The Elemental Series, #1 to me is different from Elemental, #1 BUT I would still not include the word "series" in the listing as it would then show as "The Elemental Series series" which looks odd. Putting The Elemental Series #1 on the book record is fine, in my opinion, because series information isn't required in the record at all. In the Series listing page, however, definitely not.

On the other hand, if we change the word Series into another synonym, e.g. Chronicles, we usually would retain it. For me the issue is regarding the repetition of the word 'series'.

And now the word series sounds like nonsense in my head because I've repeated it too many times >.<

[Asteropê]

Thanks everyone for the input! Your comments were more in line with my understanding of the situation.

I think I'll leave it alone -- at least in the case of this specific series.

[lethe]

Emy wrote: "The Elemental Series, #1 to me is different from Elemental, #1 BUT I would still not include the word "series" in the listing as it would then show as "The Elemental Series series" which looks odd. "

It doesn't show like that, though. On the series edit page the title is filled in as The Elemental Series, and on the series page it shows as The Elemental Series (not The Elemental Series series).

[rivka, Former Moderator]

Emy wrote: "as it would then show as "The Elemental Series series" which looks odd."

It wouldn't, actually. The series title parser specifically knows not to do that.

We have no policy on including or not including the word "Series" as part of a series' title. Therefore, if an author has a strong preference one way or the other, I see no reason not to accommodate that preference.

When the author has no such preference, my personal choice in most cases is to omit the word. Except in such cases as where it it replaced by more specific words such as trilogy, saga, etc. Those I definitely include.

Other librarians may make other choices. But it should be possible to avoid edit wars and leave the work of other librarians alone -- again, assuming a lack of strong author preference.

[Emy]

rivka wrote: "Emy wrote: "as it would then show as "The Elemental Series series" which looks odd."

It wouldn't, actually. The series title parser specifically knows not to do that."

Good to know!

[Bookbee]

I had a look at this (it's how I learn the fine points of what to do/not do as a librarian). Bringing up the "combine" page shows all the previous librarian notes and I noticed that there were a number of notes indicating that a book should not be combined with a previous edition because it had been revised and issued a different ISBN.

My understanding is that all editions of a book should be combined even is the title and/or author name have been changed or if the book has been revised. And as far as I can see, ISBN has no bearing on whether a book should be combined or not.

My question is - How much must a book be revised/re-written before it is considered a "different" book and should not be combined?

[rivka, Former Moderator]

New ISBN is not relevant. Taking it from novella-length to more than double that probably is sufficient to keep them separate, though.

[Bookbee]

rivka wrote: "New ISBN is not relevant. Taking it from novella-length to more than double that probably is sufficient to keep them separate, though."

Thanks for the guideline, rivka :)