Friday, February 12, 2016
Wikimedia Takes Down Diary Of Anne Frank, Uses It To Highlight Idiocy Of DMCA Rules, Copyright Terms
Techdirt: We've written a few times about the copyright status of the Diary of Anne Frank lately, mainly because it's pretty clear that the original work was supposed to enter the public domain in Europe on January 1st of this year, as it was 70 years after Frank's tragic death. However, the copyright holder, The Anne Frank Fonds organization in Switzerland has been trying to claim that the work is still under copyright, and that Anne's father, Otto Frank, is a co-author of the work. Either way, the work is not in the public domain in the US, because the US (ridiculously) grants copyrights for an even longer term than Europe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Copyright laws are a tricky situation for most artists. We want to be credited and fairly compensated for our work, but we also think our work should be made accessible to everyone. This creates a really interesting dynamic, since the current system of copyright laws and the way they are used, often leads to the removal of important cultural works from lower class accessibility. The copyright issues surrounding The Diary of Anne Frank are similar, in that by enforcing copyright laws, the work becomes significantly less accessible. Anne Frank’s Diary is considered crucial reading by most schools, and is one of the most detailed and informative accounts of the holocaust. To try and turn a profit off of this book would be unethical. But the real question lies in how the publishing company treats their ownership of the rights. I hope they decided to release a free digital version or something, so that others may have access to it.
This seems a bit ridiculous to me how US copyright laws are so long. What is really the worst about these laws is that it puts copyrights on works published in other countries. 95 years (from date of publication) is a long time for something to be under copyright. This can hold back the public's access to books, ideas, and information that could be great for people to read and know. Especially in the case of the Diary of Anne Frank which would be extremely useful in the public domain as it is a very educational book as well as providing and emotional glimpse into the holocaust.
However, when looking deeper, there are a lot of issues in this article. The main one being that the author is extremely biased against US copyright laws. As I knew next to nothing about this issue before reading it, I am sure the author’s bias has informed my opinions. I think that the article should have been more neutral, presenting more facts in an unbiased way.
Post a Comment