I am not a copyright specialist but I thought that if copyright had been maintained on the work through it's editions then older editions were no more fair game than the latest. Is that not so ?
Well, I'm surely no copyright expert, either. And, based on what I just found on wikipedia.org, I probably was wrong by assuming the 1928 book had an expired copyright.
I found this on wikipedia.org (also not authoritative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright): "In the United States, all books and other works published before 1923 have expired copyrights and are in the public domain. In addition, works published before 1964 that did not have their copyrights renewed 28 years after first publication year also are in the public domain. Hirtle points out that the great majority of these works (including 93% of the books) were not renewed after 28 years and are in the public domain."
Of course, there is a lot more information there, also, but taking that as if it were all there was, it does seem that D&M 1928 would still be copyrighted assuming the later editions included renewals of copyright, which they probably did.
Edit: fixed typos.
Edited by EricC, 09 January 2015 - 12:01 AM.