tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35762378.post1901071547924170261..comments2023-05-01T05:13:26.202-04:00Comments on Doctor Cleveland: Copyright vs. the TruthDoctor Clevelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07326408523926507003noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35762378.post-80606584673689875682014-04-10T14:43:53.427-04:002014-04-10T14:43:53.427-04:00One irony here is that Jonathan Bate wrote a biogr...One irony here is that Jonathan Bate wrote a biography of the poet John Clare (1793-1864), and many of Clare's poems are still protected by copyright because they were not published until Eric Robinson's editions. Robinson bought all of these copyrights from the Clare estate.<br /><br />The bigger irony is that some authors' estates in effect are permitted to get around the basic principle of copyright law that copyright does not protect facts as such. Part of the problem may be overly restrictive concepts of fair use (or "fair dealing"), but, as you say, the big problem is that the entire process disadvantages scholars. A round of applause should go to people like Larry Lessig for standing up for these scholars.EngLitProfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11600699743048255259noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35762378.post-33966807856767740502014-04-10T00:14:29.681-04:002014-04-10T00:14:29.681-04:00Thanks, Historiann. I hear you. And, much like you...Thanks, Historiann. I hear you. And, much like you, I'm fortunate to work on figures whose heirs died out in, say, the 1670s.<br /><br />And yes. It's one thing that literary heirs keep profiting as rent-seekers ad infinitum. It's understandable but unpleasant when they trade on their parent's name to sell their own books. But to cede them control of the historical record is an expression of outright aristocracy.Doctor Clevelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07326408523926507003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35762378.post-29812324262639589222014-04-09T23:52:44.245-04:002014-04-09T23:52:44.245-04:00This is why I only write about the long-dead. It&...This is why I only write about the long-dead. It's too much trouble to worry about the second and third generations of a literary or historical estate.<br /><br />Who are these children and grandchildren who are so defensive about their more talented progenitor/s? To hell with the whole lot of them, I say: all the Susan Cheevers, all the Christopher Dickeys, all of the Claudia Roth Pierpoints (who isn't a daughter but just a weirdly close friend.) Enough of the literary nepotism and dining on the corpses <i>ad infinitum</i>. How much are they really entitled to inherit? How much can they reasonably be expected to have control or even have a say because of the accident of their births?Historiannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10615954696251174822noreply@blogger.com