Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Lodewijk]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Lilburne 
wrote:

> On 16/02/2016 18:39, Lodewijk wrote:
>
>> If we were publishers trying to make a buck out of selling the work, I
>> would agree with you, and move on. However, that is not what we want to do
>> as a movement. We don't try to take advantage, but we want to build upon
>> works. We want to collaborate and stand on the shoulders of giants. Giants
>> like this little girl.
>>
>>
>>
> But that is exactly what you are doing. A publisher can fight for the
> right to make a buck
> without WP's help. A book of the diary costs a few pence, far less then
> the cost of the
> paper and ink for individual printing it. A digital copy is still a far
> inferior offering from a
> book version. I'm not sure that many actually prefer works like this as a
> pdf, html, or any
> other format over the book.
>
>
And that is indeed what I tried to explain in the following paragraphs. A
free work could offer more context (after all, it is over seventy years
later now, and many of the concepts she refers to are unknown to most of us
- let alone to people on the other side of the globe. Gladly, we have
websites like Wikipedia where many are described where we can link to).

Also, while the book is translated a lot, and maybe even record holder with
regards to availability in languages & sales, there are still languages it
has not been translated into. That is also an added value. And yes, a
publisher could then use those free texts to publish a dead-tree book with
it.

I am primarily trying to argue that this is not so much taking 'advantage'
but rather an opportunity to demonstrate what communities like ours are
able to accomplish. Why the public domain is good for spreading works.

Lodewijk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Lilburne]

On 16/02/2016 18:39, Lodewijk wrote:

If we were publishers trying to make a buck out of selling the work, I
would agree with you, and move on. However, that is not what we want to do
as a movement. We don't try to take advantage, but we want to build upon
works. We want to collaborate and stand on the shoulders of giants. Giants
like this little girl.




But that is exactly what you are doing. A publisher can fight for the 
right to make a buck
without WP's help. A book of the diary costs a few pence, far less then 
the cost of the
paper and ink for individual printing it. A digital copy is still a far 
inferior offering from a
book version. I'm not sure that many actually prefer works like this as 
a pdf, html, or any

other format over the book.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Yury Bulka]

WereSpielChequers  writes:

> I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been
> murdered, especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to
> make that a test case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered
> she might well still be alive today, and presumably her work would
> still be in copyright.
>

This is one of the reasons why I believe that the current copyright
system (where the copyright term is determined by the date of author's
death) is flawed.

It results in a situation where certain works belonging to the same
historical period may have insanely different copyright terms.

-- 
Юрко Булка | Yury Bulka | gpg:
36DD 7515 B47D E2C9 9057 D440 D834 635C A947 0CA2

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Oliver Keyes]

If she'd lived, her book _wouldn't be so important to the entirety of
humankind_.

You have a feeling about what she'd do about it? You're putting words
in a Holocaust victim's mouth. For shame.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Tomasz Ganicz  wrote:
> Well.. I don't think if it is good point. I mean - I have rather feeling
> that if only she could, she would probably decide to release her diary to
> public domain. Or in other words - this text is so important to the entire
> humankind that its publishing should not be blocked by copyright law just
> in order to produce some extra income.
>
> We had similar case in Poland - regarding works of Janusz Korczak, of which
> copyright was extended due to some legal tricks which were very disputable.
> I helped a bit in legal battle to put his works back to public domain and
> am quite proud to do so...
>
>
>
> 2016-02-16 19:38 GMT+01:00 Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
> rient...@wikimedia.nl>:
>
>> I think you raise a very good point, Jonathan.  Anne Frank's diary is not
>> just any book.
>>
>> Paradoxically, the very fact that this is a special book by a special
>> author is also the reason why many people - especially in the Netherlands -
>> are uncomfortable about the recent and unexpected introduction of the
>> possibility that there is a co-author.
>>
>> Definitely, this is a very sensitive issue and Wikimedia Nederland is
>> proceeding very, very cautiously.  No-one should play copyright games with
>> Anne Frank's diary.
>>
>> (For those interested, ENWP has good information on the copyright issues:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_of_a_Young_Girl#Copyright_and_ownership_dispute
>> )
>>
>>
>> Sandra Rientjes
>> Directeur Wikimedia Nederland
>> 06 31786379
>>
>> verzonden vanaf mobiel
>> I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered,
>> especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test
>> case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well still
>> be alive today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.
>>
>> By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things
>> openly, and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright on
>> faithful copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in
>> countries less open about such things than Armenia or the UK.
>>
>> I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase
>> awareness of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms."
>> Though I'd hope there are other examples where we don't look like taking
>> advantage of the murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an
>> example of us taking copyright seriously.
>>
>> But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying to
>> force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her
>> relatives?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Tomasz Ganicz]

Well.. I don't think if it is good point. I mean - I have rather feeling
that if only she could, she would probably decide to release her diary to
public domain. Or in other words - this text is so important to the entire
humankind that its publishing should not be blocked by copyright law just
in order to produce some extra income.

We had similar case in Poland - regarding works of Janusz Korczak, of which
copyright was extended due to some legal tricks which were very disputable.
I helped a bit in legal battle to put his works back to public domain and
am quite proud to do so...



2016-02-16 19:38 GMT+01:00 Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
rient...@wikimedia.nl>:

> I think you raise a very good point, Jonathan.  Anne Frank's diary is not
> just any book.
>
> Paradoxically, the very fact that this is a special book by a special
> author is also the reason why many people - especially in the Netherlands -
> are uncomfortable about the recent and unexpected introduction of the
> possibility that there is a co-author.
>
> Definitely, this is a very sensitive issue and Wikimedia Nederland is
> proceeding very, very cautiously.  No-one should play copyright games with
> Anne Frank's diary.
>
> (For those interested, ENWP has good information on the copyright issues:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_of_a_Young_Girl#Copyright_and_ownership_dispute
> )
>
>
> Sandra Rientjes
> Directeur Wikimedia Nederland
> 06 31786379
>
> verzonden vanaf mobiel
> I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered,
> especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test
> case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well still
> be alive today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.
>
> By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things
> openly, and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright on
> faithful copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in
> countries less open about such things than Armenia or the UK.
>
> I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase
> awareness of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms."
> Though I'd hope there are other examples where we don't look like taking
> advantage of the murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an
> example of us taking copyright seriously.
>
> But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying to
> force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her
> relatives?
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Pharos]

This is also a major work that a lot of people in the global Jewish
community would feel is an important part of the public domain, and
enhancing of public education on these topics.

http://jewishfreeculture.org/sourcetexts/het-achterhuis-anne-frank-the-diary-of-anne-frank-amsterdam-1947/

Thanks,
Pharos

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Lodewijk 
wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> We all realize how sensitive a subject this is. Not only because of the
> reasons you give, but also for the obvious reason that this is a highly
> influential and well known work we're talking about.
>
> If we were publishers trying to make a buck out of selling the work, I
> would agree with you, and move on. However, that is not what we want to do
> as a movement. We don't try to take advantage, but we want to build upon
> works. We want to collaborate and stand on the shoulders of giants. Giants
> like this little girl.
>
> Before the WMF deleted the pages from Wikisource, we were working on a
> context enriched version, and considering working on a free translation
> into English, which could then be used to spread the lessons this book can
> teach us to other languages beyond those in which it already is available.
> That would improve people's understanding, that would increase its reach.
>
> Please note that the Anne Frank Fund is not the only charity that works on
> this legacy. Other relevant organisations (I don't know if I can go into
> details publicly) were more supportive.
>
> Best regards,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 6:35 PM, WereSpielChequers <
> werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered,
> > especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test
> > case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well
> still
> > be alive today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.
> >
> > By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things
> > openly, and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright
> on
> > faithful copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in
> > countries less open about such things than Armenia or the UK.
> >
> > I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase
> > awareness of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms."
> > Though I'd hope there are other examples where we don't look like taking
> > advantage of the murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an
> > example of us taking copyright seriously.
> >
> > But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying
> > to force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her
> > relatives?
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Lodewijk]

Hi Jonathan,

We all realize how sensitive a subject this is. Not only because of the
reasons you give, but also for the obvious reason that this is a highly
influential and well known work we're talking about.

If we were publishers trying to make a buck out of selling the work, I
would agree with you, and move on. However, that is not what we want to do
as a movement. We don't try to take advantage, but we want to build upon
works. We want to collaborate and stand on the shoulders of giants. Giants
like this little girl.

Before the WMF deleted the pages from Wikisource, we were working on a
context enriched version, and considering working on a free translation
into English, which could then be used to spread the lessons this book can
teach us to other languages beyond those in which it already is available.
That would improve people's understanding, that would increase its reach.

Please note that the Anne Frank Fund is not the only charity that works on
this legacy. Other relevant organisations (I don't know if I can go into
details publicly) were more supportive.

Best regards,
Lodewijk

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 6:35 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered,
> especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test
> case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well still
> be alive today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.
>
> By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things
> openly, and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright on
> faithful copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in
> countries less open about such things than Armenia or the UK.
>
> I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase
> awareness of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms."
> Though I'd hope there are other examples where we don't look like taking
> advantage of the murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an
> example of us taking copyright seriously.
>
> But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying
> to force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her
> relatives?
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland]

I think you raise a very good point, Jonathan.  Anne Frank's diary is not
just any book.

Paradoxically, the very fact that this is a special book by a special
author is also the reason why many people - especially in the Netherlands -
are uncomfortable about the recent and unexpected introduction of the
possibility that there is a co-author.

Definitely, this is a very sensitive issue and Wikimedia Nederland is
proceeding very, very cautiously.  No-one should play copyright games with
Anne Frank's diary.

(For those interested, ENWP has good information on the copyright issues:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_of_a_Young_Girl#Copyright_and_ownership_dispute)


Sandra Rientjes
Directeur Wikimedia Nederland
06 31786379

verzonden vanaf mobiel
I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered,
especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test
case re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well still
be alive today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.

By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things
openly, and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright on
faithful copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in
countries less open about such things than Armenia or the UK.

I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase
awareness of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms."
Though I'd hope there are other examples where we don't look like taking
advantage of the murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an
example of us taking copyright seriously.

But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying to
force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her relatives?

Regards

Jonathan/WereSpielChequers



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[WereSpielChequers]

I may have an unpopular view here, but when an author has been murdered, 
especially one so young, I find it distasteful to try to make that a test case 
re copyright. If Anne Frank hadn't been murdered she might well still be alive 
today, and presumably her work would still be in copyright.

By all means we should be encouraging people to freely license things openly, 
and arguing for open licensing against those who claim copyright on faithful 
copies of out of copyright work, and for freedom of panorama in countries less 
open about such things than Armenia or the UK.

I'm sort of OK about as Michael Maggs put it  using it to "increase awareness 
of the excessive length (95 years) of some US copyright terms." Though I'd hope 
there are other examples where we don't look like taking advantage of the 
murder of a child. I'm also OK with using this as an example of us taking 
copyright seriously.

But though it is an important work, is it really one we should be trying to 
force into the open against the wishes of a charity set up by her relatives?

Regards

Jonathan/WereSpielChequers



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[geni]

On 16 February 2016 at 14:43, Michael Maggs  wrote:

> It's worth noting, if only to increase awareness of the excessive length
> (95 years) of some US copyright terms.
>


Thats hardly a US only thing though. The Leni Riefenstahl (yes that one)
film The Blue Light will have a 141 year copyright term.


-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Asaf Bartov]

Thank you, Sandra.

So long as a court has not ruled, it is important to not give up without a
fight.

  A.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
rient...@wikimedia.nl> wrote:

> The situation concerning the copyright on Anne Frank's writings is quite
> complex - and it is not just US copyright which is causing problems.
>
> There appears to be some consensus that the Dutch text of the diary as
> first published in 1947 is now in the public domain in the Netherlands. But
> writings by Anne first published in 1986 remain under copyright until 2036.
>
> However, the current holder of the copyright, the Anne Frank Fund in
> Switzerland, is claiming that  Anne's father should be considered a
> co-author of the original diary. This would extend copyright until 2050, 70
> years after his death. Some experts in copyright-law feel this could be a
> valid argument, but the claim has sofar not been confirmed by any court.
> Experts on the writings of Anne Frank tend to dismiss it. Still, the
>  National Library of the Netherlands has already removed the text of the
> diary from their digital library
>  at the request of the Anne
> Frank Fund.
>
> Wikimedia Nederland is exploring what can be done to keep this very
> important book in the public domain.
>
> Sandra Rientjes
> Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
>
> tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238
> mob. (+31) (0)6 31786379
>
> www.wikimedia.nl
>
> *Postadres*: *
> Bezoekadres:*
> Postbus 167Mariaplaats 3
> 3500 AD  Utrecht Utrecht
>
> 2016-02-16 15:43 GMT+01:00 Michael Maggs :
>
> > I haven't seen any mention on this list of this recent news:
> >
> > This year The Diary of Anne Frank entered into the public domain in the
> > Netherlands, allowing millions of people around the world to read it for
> > free.
> > However, under U.S. law the book remains copyrighted, which prompted the
> > Wikimedia Foundation to remove a copy of the book from its servers, under
> > protest.
> >
> > It's worth noting, if only to increase awareness of the excessive length
> > (95 years) of some US copyright terms.
> >
> > Some people outside the Wiki world have noticed: see blog post here:
> >
> https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-copyright-law-forces-wikimedia-to-remove-public-domain-anne-frank-diary-160211/
> >
> > Michael
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland]

The situation concerning the copyright on Anne Frank's writings is quite
complex - and it is not just US copyright which is causing problems.

There appears to be some consensus that the Dutch text of the diary as
first published in 1947 is now in the public domain in the Netherlands. But
writings by Anne first published in 1986 remain under copyright until 2036.

However, the current holder of the copyright, the Anne Frank Fund in
Switzerland, is claiming that  Anne's father should be considered a
co-author of the original diary. This would extend copyright until 2050, 70
years after his death. Some experts in copyright-law feel this could be a
valid argument, but the claim has sofar not been confirmed by any court.
Experts on the writings of Anne Frank tend to dismiss it. Still, the
 National Library of the Netherlands has already removed the text of the
diary from their digital library
 at the request of the Anne
Frank Fund.

Wikimedia Nederland is exploring what can be done to keep this very
important book in the public domain.

Sandra Rientjes
Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland

tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238
mob. (+31) (0)6  31786379

www.wikimedia.nl

*Postadres*: * Bezoekadres:*
Postbus 167Mariaplaats 3
3500 AD  Utrecht Utrecht

2016-02-16 15:43 GMT+01:00 Michael Maggs :

> I haven't seen any mention on this list of this recent news:
>
> This year The Diary of Anne Frank entered into the public domain in the
> Netherlands, allowing millions of people around the world to read it for
> free.
> However, under U.S. law the book remains copyrighted, which prompted the
> Wikimedia Foundation to remove a copy of the book from its servers, under
> protest.
>
> It's worth noting, if only to increase awareness of the excessive length
> (95 years) of some US copyright terms.
>
> Some people outside the Wiki world have noticed: see blog post here:
> https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-copyright-law-forces-wikimedia-to-remove-public-domain-anne-frank-diary-160211/
>
> Michael
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] US Copyright Law Forces Wikimedia to remove Public Domain Anne Frank Diary

[Michael Maggs]

I haven't seen any mention on this list of this recent news:

This year The Diary of Anne Frank entered into the public domain in the 
Netherlands, allowing millions of people around the world to read it for 
free.
However, under U.S. law the book remains copyrighted, which prompted the 
Wikimedia Foundation to remove a copy of the book from its servers, 
under protest.


It's worth noting, if only to increase awareness of the excessive length 
(95 years) of some US copyright terms.


Some people outside the Wiki world have noticed: see blog post here:  
https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-copyright-law-forces-wikimedia-to-remove-public-domain-anne-frank-diary-160211/ 



Michael
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,