Slashdot Mirror
A Copyright Nightmare
New submitter forkfail writes "If further proof were needed that copyright law was out of control in the U.S., it can be found in the fact that it costs 10 dollars to view Martin Luther King's famous Dream Speech. You might think you could find it on YouTube or other public venues, given its importance in American history. But no — the rights are firmly locked away until 2038."
How can an speech that occurs in public be "copyrighted"? I can see how an individual recording could be -- If I take a photograph of you I own the copyright, presumably that applies to videos as well. How can it be though that there isn't one recording of his speech that's been released in the public domain? Surely not everybody who was there with a camera was interested in money and greed?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Create a parody under fair use, with the original audio track, and Martin Luther King flying though space emitting a rainbow.
But, but ... this is capitalism at its very best!
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
How can it be though that there isn't one recording of his speech that's been released in the public domain?
I was thinking that exact same thought as I read it to start with, but then I got to thinking about when the speech was made. It's not like there were cellphones that recorded video, it's not like there were handycams that fit into your hand - or on your shoulder for that matter. The number of people recording that speech was probably indeed just one or two. If that is the case, then it is quite likely that while the speech itself is not copyright, the only available footage of the speech is locked down in copyright as tight as tight can be.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Not only is this story a dupe, but it was posted by the very same person when TFA originally came out.
The Copyright Nightmare of I Have A Dream
But he didn't mind plagiarizing others' work when it suited him. As in his dissertation. And part of his "I Have a Dream" speech was taken from Archibald Carey, another black preacher.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Cultures need to be able to decide for themselves what is significant. In order to do that, copyright needs to have a limit. I would suggest no more than 2 generations, or 38 years.
No, because if you don't have access to your culture during the span of your generation, it is not your culture anymore. Copyright should be abolished altogether (although I would grudgingly agree to half a generation or less).
Unfortunately, I do not have any input on the decision so you may ignore me, just as "my" government does.
Are you saying the photographers subject retains the copyright then? If so, please provide a citation. Everything my searches are finding seem to indicate the copyright belongs to the person who clicked the button that caused the image to be made.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Even more proof that adjudicating ideas to specific people and their descendants or to ever-living corporations is insanity.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Everything my searches are finding seem to indicate the copyright belongs to the person who clicked the button that caused the image to be made.
That is correct. The photography release forms that people are familiar with are related to invasion of privacy and defamation, not copyright.
Replying to your original post, the difference is that you are not a creative work; your physical body is a product of nature/genetics/parents/god/whatever, but it is not a creative work of man*. A speech is. It is every bit as creative and unique as prose in a book, and should be just as eligible for copyright.
That said, I do think there should be significant fair use rights for works like this, but I think it is the nature of the subject, not the fact that it was performed in the public that differentiates it.
* You're body could be a canvas for a creative work, but that is another issue.