Martin Luther King’s 'I Have a Dream' Speech Should Belong to Everyone, not SONY

MLK orating Aug. 28, 1963

People around the world have been marking the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream speech.

What I find absurd is that the King speech — one of the most important civil rights speeches in history — is under copyright in the U.S. and will be so until the year 2038.



[LINK: MLK I Have a Dream speech]

Free at last, free at last? Nope. Pay a licensing fee to use it in its entirety. Want to listen to the whole 17 minutes, legally? Shell out $20 for the DVD. Pay out enough money, and you can use the speech in an advertisement like Alcatel did in 2001...




[LINK: Alcatel I Have a Dream ad]

The speech should be in the public domain. It belongs to all of us. Yes, I understand the desire to keep anyone from misappropriating the text. But I think a larger social good comes from people being able to access, share, and interpret the text in their own way. The content transcends.

P.S. SONY is the current copyright enforcer. SONY! [I believe the King family retains ownership of the copyright itself]

More reading
Why MLK’s 'Dream' Is So Hard to Find Online [National Journal]
‘I Have a Dream’ speech still private property [Washington Post]

Calvin Updates His Status

Ever wonder what Calvin’s Twitter stream would be like?

A slight adulteration brings this Calvin and Hobbes strip into the current age. I’ve been mulling about various aspects of remix culture lately...

Fair Use Statement
This post may contain copyrighted material for which the usage has not been pre-authorized. Such material is being made available with the intent of providing commentary and critique of an educational nature. All Calvin and Hobbes images are copyright © Universal Press Syndicate and are the original artwork of Bill Watterson. This post is not associated with Universal UClick, Bill Watterson or any other unmentioned publishing company in any way. No infringements of any copyrights or trademarks are intended. It is intended that persons visiting this post do so for personal reasons only.  

This material is presented to you under the auspices of 17 U.S. Code, Section 107, with the understanding that this material is provided in a not-for-profit manner, for educational purposes only. The appearance of any content in this post does not automatically imply that you have the right to use it; if you wish to procure a license to reproduce any of the materials contained within, please contact the content owner directly. No financial loss is intended to Universal UClick, Bill Watterson or any other copyright owner. In making the above statements of request and intent it is intended that this post should therefore be protected under the 'fair use' provisions of copyright law.


Additional light reading
No copyright intended - Andy Baio
Remix - Lawrence Lessig
Copyright and Remixing - Edward Lee

Canadian copyright class action suit settled for $50 million

The largest Canadian copyright class action suit has been settled for $50 million. The offenders? The four labels comprising the Canadian Recording Industry Association — EMI, Sony Music, Universal Music, and Warner Music. Ahem.

Filesharing? Why, that's illegal! Unauthorized! Highly immoral. Tut tut. Oh, you mean actually selling music without a license for those works or paying royalties? Gee whiz, that's not piracy. Be a good fellow, let us settle this matter amicably. And incidentally we admit no liability... Arrr.... 

This news got turned into my first posted slashdot submission! [get it, first posted? haha.] Yay. I feel like a nerd now. (It's not a very commented-on post, but whatever, people are bored of endless stories of music industry hypocrisy...)