Joseph Goebbels Estate Wins Copyright Suit Over Use Of Nazi's Diary In Biography
from the nazis-i-hate-these-guys dept
Decades later, the Nazis, or at least the estate of a long-dead Nazi, gets a win. In a case we had written about months ago, in which the estate of infamous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels sued Random House Germany over the inclusion of quotes from Goebbels' diary, claiming copyright infringement, we raised the story up as an example of why fair use rights are necessary for the sake of scholarly work. The idea that the estate of an historical figure could censor, or even put up a toll booth, between history and those that would learn from it has to be about as good of an example of what the originators of copyright didn't want as any. The whole point was to proliferate knowledge and the arts. I'm not sure why a Nazi's diary should even be afforded such protections in any respects, nevermind the estate of the dead Nazi be allowed to control the dissemination of history in this way.
The German courts appear to disagree, however, having found in the favor of the Goebbels estate.
The Munich district court ruled in favor of the estate's claims, although it pointed out that the royalty rights to Goebbles' writings would expire at the end of 2015, 70 years after his death. Random House intends to appeal the case at the German Supreme Court. If it is successful, [Random House's attorney Rainer] Dresen says, other media organizations could be examining the royalties they have been paying the Goebbels estate for their publications. "The court's ruling would declare the estate's position null and void, necessitating refunds," he says.As Mike noted in the last post, there are so very many arguments against why this ruling shouldn't have occurred. The first is that Germany ought to have something like Fair Use protections, which would have tossed this whole thing out immediately. Does Germany really want the estate's of historical figures to control historical scholarship in this way? Do we really need to trot out the whole "those who don't learn from history are deemed to repeat it" mantra?
And beyond that, it's not even clear that the Goebbel's Estate has the rights it's been selling anyway. When the US seized the original publishing house, it took control of the publishing rights for Mein Kampf, so why not Goebbels' diary as well? On top of that, it turns out Goebbels may have sold his own publishing rights to the Nazi regime, meaning the Bavarian government would now be the ownership party, not his estate. If that's the case, the Bavarian government is playing very, very dumb.
Dresen has pointed to evidence from a journal entry from 1936 when Goebbels sold the rights to Nazi state publishers. He believes this should transfer the copyright to the Bavarian government. "Bavaria is not interested," he told Newsweek, "'Show me the author's contract' they said, knowing the archives were destroyed at the war's end."Either way, pending the appeal, count this as a loss for historical scholarly work. And from a court in a country that really, really should know better than this.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, diary, germany, history, joseph goebbels, research
Companies: random house
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
More concerned about symbols than deeds
They should know better, but german politicians are currently trying to re-enact the GESTAPO (yes, they're not alone, most countries are trying to do exactly that), while depictions of the Hakenkreuz get investigated by the police, even if in a anti-nazi or historical context.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Everyone needs to be treated equally, even if they are arseholes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ahem. Can't you think of these poor, poor Goebbels heirs? How else will they put food on their tables? /dsrc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Perhaps one of our regulars can enlighten us all as to how this spurs creation again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Leave it to Timothy Geigner to make such a ridiculous comment. Just because it's the estate of a Nazi means that there should be no protections? That's such a ridiculous idea that Timothy should be ashamed of himself. Everyone is afforded the rights granted to him by copyright. Just because you do not agree with that person, even if that person is a Nazi, does not mean that that person isn't afforded protections under the copyright law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yeah. Take THAT Alan Turing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So many insightful comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It is because they had copyrights that copyright must be removed from society.
I don't want to even begin to imagine what hell humanity would have gone through if either the Bible or the Koran were copyrighted. The Bible was forbidden from being translated from Hebrew to English, and Islamofascists to this day insist the Koran should only be recited in Arabic. These are de facto copyrights in a way. And should be met with nothing other than condemnation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Try again....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
On the other hand, there is something just plain wrong that this guy's "work" has been afforded the same protections as that of Anne Frank - who's diary will go into the public domain right along side this one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So many insightful comments
I have a US patent on a process for identification of multiple comments on a single article as insightful via a human interface device that you have probably violated.
If you would like a license, we should talk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So the estate are getting only about five/six months of copyright protection out of this ruling? Why bother suing in the first place, if that's all they would have gotten?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps you could explain your rational for making exceptions to copyright law, please address the litigation discussed in this thread.
-thx
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Let's go back to original copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm not sure why estates should be afforded such protections.
We have Disney to thank for our ridiculously overextended copyright limits.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Let's go back to original copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Does Germany have laws similar to the US wrt rights being taken away (sometimes temporarily) from felons?
IIRC, some states disallow felons to profit from their crimes, whether it be book, movie or other such deals, the profits go to the victims, (and the state?).
But since this scumbag killed himself before being convicted, his estate retains the copyright. That's messed up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
He certainly will rise up from the grave and start WWIII so that he can write again!
What messed up logic that is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is it possible there are people in Germany are like those in the US...
Last I understood, being poor means the rich can do whatever they want with you, should their eyes and whims turn your way.
Here in the US, the cops can also do what they want with the poor, where the rich can avenge themselves in court.
It sucks to be poor, enough that people will murder, destroy huge estates or exploit the people to become rich.
I think the Goebbels affair is symptomatic of a much greater problem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: More concerned about symbols than deeds
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Without copyright what incentive would there be for the creation of future evil?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Abolish Copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
Now you sound as cruel and vindictive as the Nazis themselves!
What crime did the families of the Nazis commit that THEY should be penalised for the crimes of their relative?
(Goebbels and his immediate family committed suicide before the Nazis' surrender, but he had five siblings and assorted other relations, some of whom survived the war.)
Next thing you'll be telling us Osama bin Laden's family should be penalised for the crime of being related to the guy who planned 9/11.
Go read the US Constitution and ask why the US founding fathers abolished "corruption of blood" for the crime of treason in art. 3, sec. 3.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Did you mean patent rather than copyright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
That said, you do realise that there is more to the estate of a person than copyright?
By demanding there be no Goebbels estate the original OP was demanding the relatives of Joseph Goebbels were not entitled to ANY of the property of Goebbels at all, copyright rights or otherwise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The beneficiaries of the Goebbels Estate
Unless Goebbels was a profound literist, the only value of his diaries and notes is that they are associated with a war criminal and one of Hitler's inner circle.
Can someone explain to me why anyone should be able to financially benefit from control of such documents?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You could be talking about Goebbels' extensive collection of looted art.
Because Germans are a looty bunch or something?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: There shouldn't be a Goebbels Estate in the first place!
And this is considered punishment?
Wow, it's soooo harsh!
[ link to this | view in thread ]