Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Jan 2012 13:13 UTC
In the News "Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'I Have a Dream' speech is considered one of the most recognizable collection of words in American history. It's the rhetorical equivalent of a national treasure or a national park. The National Park Service inscribed it on the Lincoln Memorial and the Library of Congress put it into its National Recording Registry. So we might hold it to be self evident that it can be spread freely. Not exactly. Any unauthorized usage of the speech and a number of other speeches by King - including in PBS documentaries - is a violation of American law. You'd be hard pressed to find a good complete video version on the web, and it's not even to be found in the new digital archive of the King Center's website. If you want to watch the whole thing, legally, you'll need to get the $20 DVD." I'm probably too young and too non-American to really fully grasp just how important Mr King was to a segregated America, but the fact that his influential and world-changing speeches are locked up because of copyright, as well as the fact that EMI is actually actively pursuing its copyright, is downright insane. If anybody ever needed even more proof the content industry is a vile, rotting, stinking and utterly putrid clump of pure, concentrated evil, this is it. Absolutely unbelievable.
Thread beginning with comment 503791
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: How come
by Fergy on Tue 17th Jan 2012 19:06 UTC in reply to "RE: How come"
Member since:

I am not sure he actually gave the speech in a "public" place. Further, as the author he has some rights to how its distributed. I don't like the way it is but not sure how I would change things.

Sure you get a temporary monopoly on your work but 70+ years? I would love to get paid over and over again for the same work I did decades ago but I wouldn't find it fair.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: How come
by Laurence on Thu 19th Jan 2012 09:53 in reply to "RE[2]: How come"
Laurence Member since:

Sure you get a temporary monopoly on your work but 70+ years? I would love to get paid over and over again for the same work I did decades ago but I wouldn't find it fair.

Indeed - the whole thing is absurd.

My girlfriend is a school teacher and it would be great if she got royalties for every occasion that her pupils applied lessons they'd learned from her - both present and any time in the future. However the world doesn't work that way - or at least shouldn't. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: How come
by zima on Tue 24th Jan 2012 23:51 in reply to "RE[3]: How come"
zima Member since:

Oh I think it does work that way (in broader context, not only ~copyright & performances); it's generally less clear than people like to make it out to be (and needs better arguments - or, too often, any arguments - for why one "can't" benefit from items which are more in the virtual sphere)

After all - from a "normal" property (or, say, one intermediate thing from my place ) your heirs can obviously benefit, also without work on their part, long after you're dead. Property which now, ultimately, is just a snippet in some databases (so sort of "virtual" - and sure, one might say that's a value attached to physical, hence scarce, goods, but a) we clearly treat agreed values of different kinds of goods as interchangeable b) at the very least, "virtual goods" tend to be made by humans - hence are also impacted by scarcities)

Yeah, it will be a mess to figure out / "not sure how I would change things"

Reply Parent Score: 2