Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

varnull.adityamukerjee.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 234 posts

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#91

Post by andybak »

Zimahl wrote: post #73
e12e wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

MLK decided to use peaceful civil disobedience following the lead of Ghandi. Peaceful protest doesn't lead to a majority backlash, whereas aggressive, militant tactics do. MLK and his movement are remembered for boycotts and protest leading to the Civil Rights Act. The Black Panthers are remembered as being violent and divisive. For all the good you do can be wiped out in one instant by a single bad.

I'd like to get confirmation of this by someone who knows more Indian history than I do but I've been told more than once that the popular narrative than independence was secured almost entirely by Gandhian non-violence is woefully oversold.

There are many statues to armed freedom fighters around India and Indian Railways famously have special counters provided as a privilege for "Senior Citizens, Disabled, MLAs and Freedom Fighters".

Subhash Chandra Bose who led the Indian National Army against the British and with Japanese support is still regarded as a hero by many. I'm sure someone with better knowledge than I can provide other examples of how the armed struggle was key and is still regarded as such within India.

Similarly there is evidence from Northern Ireland that it was the increasing violence - especially when it spread to the mainland - that led the British to negotiate with the Republicans.

I aspire to pacifism by the way. I'm just not sure if every historical example can bend to support it.

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#92

Post by Medea »

We actually read the full speech in school and watched the youtube video. We got it as a copy from a textbook called "Speeches that changed the world" by Simon Sebag Montefiore.

You can get the ebook from the google play store. From the free sample it seems like they got permission to reproduce copyrigth material from The Estate of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr.

https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=jPArcMn728kC

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#93

Post by mcherm »

drivingmenuts wrote: post #69
bpatrianakos wrote: post #58

The 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 delive…

I agree. I think the question should be: Would Dr. King have kept it locked up by copyright? I don't think he would, but I have only my own faith to back that up.

Actually, he did. Before his death, Dr. King actively maintained the copyright on the speech, hoping that any profits from its distribution would be spent to help fund his causes.

Perhaps the question should be: Would Dr. King have kept it locked up by copyright for more than 50 years?

Actually, my question is this "SHOULD this speech (and other works) be kept locked up by copyright for more than 50 years?"

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#95

Post by speedyrev »

hudibras wrote: post #39
clicks wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And watch it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs Incidentally, please do take the 17 minutes to watch this speech (and perhaps follow along with yread's transcript link). It really is one of the greatest speeches ever given.

And keep in mind that MLK was 34 years old when he gave that speech. I'm trying hard not to think about what I was doing at that age...

Also keep in mind that the last portion starting with "I have a dream..." and following was all improvised. The original draft didn't include those words.

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#96

Post by slacka »

s32dA wrote: post #38

This is one of the most widely circulated speeches on the internet. If you Google "I Have A Dream Speech", you'll get the pdf, origial text and full video. What a stupid post.

I can also Google "Man of Steel (2013) torrent" and download a copy in minutes. That doesn't make it legal. Likewise, you can't stream or show "I Have A Dream Speech" or "Man of Steel" to an audience without violating copyright laws.

The real stupidity are our laws extending copyright to 70 years after death, so backwards that many people just chose to ignore them.

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#97

Post by JPKab »

eplanit wrote: post #25

And, the U.S. government had to _pay_ the king family $800,000 for the rights to use his copyrighted words on the very statue built to memorialize him. ( http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/08/maya-angelou-u... )

Can someone please explain this? Do his children depend on the royalties for income?

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#98

Post by jared314 »

hearty777 wrote: post #79
jared314 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And as for the "MLK-Hitler poster" argument, that would be fair use Selling MLK-Hitler posters would not count as fair use. That was the point I was making.

Are you serious? I'm fairly sure you're protected by the first amendment for selling MLK-Hitler posters. In fact, you can Google for those items now. Here's one: http://www.redbubble.com/people/artofmewa/works/8484381-the-...

Their existence only proves they haven't been sued yet. But, you have a good point. Perhaps I am mixing Trademark, and Right of Publicity, with Copyright. All of them apply in this case, and have been used in the past to prevent the unauthorized use of MLK's image and works.

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#99

Post by chimeracoder »

lnanek2 wrote: post #94

This was done intentionally by MLK with the proceeds used for good works last time I looked into it. So, amusingly, articles like this are kind of written out of ignorance as to the speech itself.

> This was done intentionally by MLK with the proceeds used for good works last time I looked into it.

Irrespective of this, it reduces the number of textbooks that can publish the text of the speech to (almost) zero, since most publishers can't afford it.

This is a value judgement and therefore subjective, but I don't believe it's worth it.

Re: Why You’ve Never Read “I Have A Dream”

#100

Post by ChuckMcM »

slg wrote: post #23

I 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…

There was a PBS Documentary, "Eyes on the Prize" which we bought on DVD as part of our home school curriculum. Then it was taken off the market as a dispute arose between the King family estate[1] and PBS. The King family gave only enough copy right to show the program on PBS, once. And any other use was not sanctioned, we loaned our copy to the high school so that they could show it to their students.

It was such a remarkably egregious thing, I was amazed that more people weren't up in arms about it.

[1] http://www.current.org/2010/03/eyes-on-the-prize-triumphs-ov...

Post reply on HN