You can read it here http://www.archives.gov/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf
And listen to it (while reading the transcript) here http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1227012...
Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
51–60 of 234 posts
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#52I have to disagree with part of the premise. While the speech is copyrighted, that might not be the reason most people haven't read or seen the entirety of the speech. If schools really wanted to teach it, it would be well within fair use laws for them to show the whole thing. There are probably a variety of other reasons why you don't see this speech taught in schools. First one that comes to mind is its length. Unl…
> If schools really wanted to teach it, it would be well within fair use laws for them to show the whole thing.
No, not a chance. Even a few paragraphs would likely get them smashed, especially if they're the most interesting of the speech.
> First one that comes to mind is its length.
Have people stopped studying books or something?
> Secondly, there is a lot of religious imagery in the speech. I could certainly imagine people objecting to having the speech presented in a secular school.
I wouldn't.
> Finally and probably most importantly, what do speeches really teach us? They aren't particularly valuable outside of context.
It's quite obvious that the speech would be put in context by and used within civil rights study.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#53I remember hearing the story of how the text was written and at the last minute, as copies were being made, the lawyer for King added the Circle C and copyright info. Apparently the King family has benefitted financially by that last minute addition. Frankly, I can't imagine a better way to reward Dr. King, and his family, for such an amazing event and turning point in our history. It's not like the money is going to…
Unless copyright law has changed since then, the circle c doesn't matter. The way copyright works in the US, the rights to any creative work are automatically reserved for the author.
This did in fact change since King's time. IIRC, what you say is true only after the adoption of the Berne convention in 1988.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#54The counter argument, though, is "How many people have read Lincoln's Gettysburg Address"? Many know "Four score and seven years ago", but how many know "we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground"? I think this says more about our "sound-bite" culture than how protective the family is of the audio.
>The counter argument, though, is "How many >people have read Lincoln's Gettysburg Address"? Your counter-argument was about as valid as saying "How many people have needed freedom?" In any case, your counter-argument seems unrelated to the OP's post... Whether or not people would read or listen to the entire speech, the OP was arguing that copyright laws are impeding the creation of new content, the consumption of e…
Why are you making this about me?
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#55I remember hearing the story of how the text was written and at the last minute, as copies were being made, the lawyer for King added the Circle C and copyright info. Apparently the King family has benefitted financially by that last minute addition. Frankly, I can't imagine a better way to reward Dr. King, and his family, for such an amazing event and turning point in our history. It's not like the money is going to…
Unless copyright law has changed since then, the circle c doesn't matter. The way copyright works in the US, the rights to any creative work are automatically reserved for the author.
That changed around 1989 with the Berne convention to be the way you describe.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FBI was doing a whole lot more than trying to link him to the communists. It was standard operation to infiltrate all civil rights groups. I don;t know specifically what they did to King's org, but the Black Panthers were fucked by the FBI. Malcom X's body guard, for example, was an undercover FBI agent. Most of the civil rights groups had undercover FBI inside them, and in high ranking positions. Yet another exa…
Can infiltrating the Black Panthers really be considered "anti-freedoms"? What freedoms, exactly? The freedom to be violent?
The Panthers did a LOT more than be violent. They opened soup kitchens, and housed the homeless. They were a terrific organization for helping people int heir communities. The violence and such was, actually, a product of the FBI. Just as they do today, the FBI embedded rabbel rousers in Panther events, and used them to touch off violence and whip up the crowd. The FBI actually encouraged the behavior they were there to prevent. They do the EXACT same thing in Occupy protests, today. The fact that you believe the Panthers were nothing more than a violent group shows that the FBI won this battle.
Here, read up on the Panthers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
From the Wikipedia: Federal Bureau of Investigation Director J. Edgar Hoover called the party "the greatest threat to the internal security of the country,"[13] and he supervised an extensive program (COINTELPRO) of surveillance, infiltration, perjury, police harassment and many other tactics designed to undermine Panther leadership, incriminate party members and drain the organization of resources and manpower. Through these tactics, Hoover hoped to diminish the Party's threat to the general power structure of the U.S., or even maintain its influence as a strong undercurrent.[14] Angela Davis, Ward Churchill, and others have alleged that federal, state and local law enforcement officials went to great lengths to discredit and destroy the organization, including assassination.[15][16][17] Black Panther Party membership reached a peak of 10,000 by early 1969, then suffered a series of contractions due to legal troubles, incarcerations, internal splits, expulsions and defections. Popular support for the Party declined further after reports appeared detailing the group's involvement in illegal activities such as drug dealing and extortion schemes directed against Oakland merchants.[18] By 1972 most Panther activity centered on the national headquarters and a school in Oakland, where the party continued to influence local politics. Party contractions continued throughout the 1970s; by 1980 the Black Panther Party comprised just 27 members.[19]
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FBI was doing a whole lot more than trying to link him to the communists. It was standard operation to infiltrate all civil rights groups. I don;t know specifically what they did to King's org, but the Black Panthers were fucked by the FBI. Malcom X's body guard, for example, was an undercover FBI agent. Most of the civil rights groups had undercover FBI inside them, and in high ranking positions. Yet another exa…
Can infiltrating the Black Panthers really be considered "anti-freedoms"? What freedoms, exactly? The freedom to be violent?
Perhaps the freedom to self defence? The Black Panther party didn't magically appear out of a vacuum, to boldly proclaim equal rights and freedom from police brutality, where no oppression existed.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#58The author here makes a good point until he asks his final question. In the case of Dr. Martin Luther King I don't believe copyright would have had any influence on the likelihood of delivering it. The purpose of the speech was selfless and so despite the copyright issue being disappointing it doesn't seem like he would have said "well, since future students won't be able to read the full text of my speech why deliver it?" Though he understood the significance of the march and probably knew his speech was important is there any evidence to suggest he knew how iconic it would become? And even if he did, was he going to forego addressing his audience, the people assembled at the Lincoln Memorial, to make a statement on copyright? It's doubtful. His speech was for the audience there. The fact that it could be reprinted and studied by future generations is just a bonus. The idea that King would be less likely to deliver his speech because of copyright is not realistic.
That said, this also isn't a convincing argument for the abolition of copyright either. I don't know if that was the point though. What this does show is how a copyright can serve the opposite of its intended purpose and hurt society. But for every case like the King speech there are plenty more that are examples of its benefit.
It's disappointing that we do not have free and open access to the I Have a Dream speech but its not a good argument against copyright. Copyright is still an issue that boils down to its use and has to be considered on a case by case basis. I don't think it ever has been all good or all bad and overlooking the vast sea of nuance there doesn't help proponents or opponents of it.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#59I have to disagree with part of the premise. While the speech is copyrighted, that might not be the reason most people haven't read or seen the entirety of the speech. If schools really wanted to teach it, it would be well within fair use laws for them to show the whole thing. There are probably a variety of other reasons why you don't see this speech taught in schools. First one that comes to mind is its length. Unl…
> If schools really wanted to teach it, it would be well within fair use laws for them to show the whole thing. No, not a chance. Even a few paragraphs would likely get them smashed, especially if they're the most interesting of the speech. > First one that comes to mind is its length. Have people stopped studying books or something? > Secondly, there is a lot of religious imagery in the speech. I could certainly ima…
Schools have successfully used copyrighted books all the time in literature classes without problems. You can't run it off yourself on the mimeograph machine but just go buy 30 copies and leave them in the classroom.
Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FBI was doing a whole lot more than trying to link him to the communists. It was standard operation to infiltrate all civil rights groups. I don;t know specifically what they did to King's org, but the Black Panthers were fucked by the FBI. Malcom X's body guard, for example, was an undercover FBI agent. Most of the civil rights groups had undercover FBI inside them, and in high ranking positions. Yet another exa…
Can infiltrating the Black Panthers really be considered "anti-freedoms"? What freedoms, exactly? The freedom to be violent?
Agreed, I thought the same way. To quote the Beatles:
We all want to change the world / But when you talk about destruction /Don't you know that you can count me out
But when you want money / For people with minds that hate / All I can tell is brother you have to wait