3 ms·
Lots of rage here against the US government, little rage against the Anne Frank Fonds that actually asserts the copyright. If you really feel so strongly then
by tome 11y ago
Lots of rage here against the US government, little rage against the Anne Frank Fonds that actually asserts the copyright.
If you really feel so strongly then go and rail against the foundation who could transfer the book into the public domain with least a million times (literally) less difficulty than it would take to get US copyright law changed to have the same effect.
http://www.annefrank.ch/qa-en.html http://www.annefrank.ch/qa-en.html
- zoise 11y agoThank you for this gesture of support for identity. What is rare, is empathy for the trauma of s/cop/ying. Anger and language for this kind of term (a form of abuse) is important to justify literally, and trigger emotional correlary.
- mtgx 11y agoWell you know what they say when it comes to patents, too? "Hate the game, not the player". But I'm fair, and I think we should hate both.
- the8472 11y agoBut that would not fix the problem in general. Consider orphan works for example.
- r0muald 11y agoSo today rally against the Anne Frank Fonds. Tomorrow against Disney. Then what? If the law creates an artificial incentive that damages the public good, are you going to separately criticize each one of those who take advantage of that, or to ask to change the law?
- Shivetya 11y agothere can be no public good if you deprive people of their property rights because you somehow take offense at their exercise of those rights. While there should be some limit on how long you can retain copyright I seriously would not want it to be less than the current and following generation, if not the third.
- dredmorbius 11y agoAttacking Fonds is striking at branches. Attacking the law is striking at roots. Rootstriking is vastly more efficient.