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 <lodew...@effeietsanders.org> 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: Wikimediaemail@example.com > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>