Is The Diary of Anne Frank PD?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JoeD

Maybe if/when the dutch version falls into the PD, a community will translate it to various languages and release those into PD or c.c.

Fortunatately, that won't happen for a long time. Otto Frank, who I believe would be regarded as the author as far as copyright goes, died in 1980, so it won't enter the public domain in Europe until 1st Jan 2051. I share the views of the previous posters who state that the Anne Frank Foundation are richly deserving of the royalties from the sale of the book.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Fortunatately, that won't happen for a long time. Otto Frank, who I believe would be regarded as the author as far as copyright goes, died in 1980, so it won't enter the public domain in Europe until 1st Jan 2051. I share the views of the previous posters who state that the Anne Frank Foundation are richly deserving of the royalties from the sale of the book.

This.

Come on people, it's $5.99 on Amazon. Plus my library has 7 copies of the e-book in two different translations.

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by HarleyB

This thread is originally from January 2009 - 3 years ago. Obviously there have been a lot of ebooks released since then.

Didn't catch that. I've been trying to pay attention to that, since people seem to have been resurrecting old threads lately....sorry!

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

This.

Come on people, it's $5.99 on Amazon. Plus my library has 7 copies of the e-book in two different translations.

$0.50 for a used copy in good condition at the yearly book fair around here.

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of Otto Frank as copyright holder in his own right instead of as heir though. He didn't write it. It bugs me just as much as seeing copyright Ted Hughes on my copy of Ariel. Sylvia Plath wrote it not him.

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by crich70

You might want to look again. Amazon does seem to have it in a Kindle format.
http://www.amazon.com/Diary-Young-Gi...8171990&sr=1-1

Thank-you for that. As others have mentioned, at the time I couldn't find anything, so glad to see it available. For others, if this is a book you value, you may also wish to try Primo Levi's If This Is A Man (a.k.a Survival in Auschwitz), often sold together in one book with his The Truce (a.k.a. The Awakening). I have yet to read a more powerfully affecting book.

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

Didn't catch that. I've been trying to pay attention to that, since people seem to have been resurrecting old threads lately....sorry!

Ha! It happens, and its resurrection served decent ends, so thank-you. For what it's worth, I am after the "Critical Edition".

Cheers,
Marc

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Fortunatately, that won't happen for a long time. Otto Frank, who I believe would be regarded as the author as far as copyright goes, died in 1980, so it won't enter the public domain in Europe until 1st Jan 2051. I share the views of the previous posters who state that the Anne Frank Foundation are richly deserving of the royalties from the sale of the book.

I'm not saying they don't deserve any money they can get, just that it won't matter if the English or any other version doesn't leave copyright for a long long time. All it'll take is the first published version to go PD in whichever language that was and before long all languages will have a version they can read that's also PD.

2050 might not be a bad date though, it'll go PD and hopefully get a surge in readers and be a helpful reminder of what occurred a little over 100 years ago.

[randyroughton]

It appears it will finally be in public domain in January.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/a-most-...of-anne-frank/

[gweeks]

Only in life+70 countries. It's already public domain in life+50 countries. The copyright in the U.S. isn't affected by when the author died and no new material is entering the public domain in the U.S.

Greg

[pdurrant]

Note that it will come out of copyright only in the original language. English translations will be copyright by the translators.

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by randyroughton

It appears it will finally be in public domain in January.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/a-most-...of-anne-frank/

Originally Posted by gweeks

. . . .
no new material is entering the public domain in the U.S.

Greg

I thought that that was correct, Greg, since 1923 is, and has been as long as I can remember, the year when copyrighted works generally went into the public domain in the U.S.

Copyright laws in the U.S. are a mess, because there are all kinds of exceptions to the general rule about the year 1923. I saw a flow chart, using a whole lot of "if-then" statements, a couple of years ago, that at least attempted to show a person exactly when a copyright expired. It would take a "Philadelphia lawyer" to understand it all.

Congress really should do something truly useful, and make a goal to simplify the copyright laws. I am a real believer in people who create artistic and other works getting compensated for their time and work (I hate piracy), but 1923 was 92 years ago, and Congress needs to shorten that, also. Personally, I believe that the end of copyright should not be based on the copyright date, as it is in the U.S., but the end of the creator's life. Seventy years, as many countries have it, seems like a good limit. My opinion is, however, that Congress will continue its indolence on this matter for years to come, because relatively few people are affected and it's not a high-visibility issue like health care, education, national defense, etc. are.

[gweeks]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

I thought that that was correct, Greg, since 1923 is, and has been as long as I can remember, the year when copyrighted works generally went into the public domain in the U.S.

Copyright laws in the U.S. are a mess, because there are all kinds of exceptions to the general rule about the year 1923. I saw a flow chart, using a whole lot of "if-then" statements, a couple of years ago, that at least attempted to show a person exactly when a copyright expired. It would take a "Philadelphia lawyer" to understand it all.

Congress really should do something truly useful, and make a goal to simplify the copyright laws. I am a real believer in people who create artistic and other works getting compensated for their time and work (I hate piracy), but 1923 was 92 years ago, and Congress needs to shorten that, also. Personally, I believe that the end of copyright should not be based on the copyright date, as it is in the U.S., but the end of the creator's life. Seventy years, as many countries have it, seems like a good limit. My opinion is, however, that Congress will continue its indolence on this matter for years to come, because relatively few people are affected and it's not a high-visibility issue like health care, education, national defense, etc. are.

Anything that was published in 1978 or later falls into the life+70 rules in the U.S. It's just going to take us a long time until the old stuff expires.

Greg

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by gweeks

Anything that was published in 1978 or later falls into the life+70 rules in the U.S. It's just going to take us a long time until the old stuff expires.

Greg

Gotcha. That information is good to know. So, Congress has taken some major action.

It's nice to know that they have based the law on the end of the life of the creator, instead of the copyright date.

What about the stuff published before 1978, though? Math is not my strong suit, but it seems that, unless there is some legislation to address it, works copyrighted 1923 to 1977 will stay out of the public domain perpetually.

UPDATE: Okay, I've answered my own question. I found a very useful (but not particularly attractive) flowchart at http://sunsteinlaw.com/practices/cop...ght-flowchart/. It looks like the 1923-1977 stuff has been addressed. What I remembered as being all kinds of exceptions are not really that. They serve to delineate the phases that stuff copyrighted 1923-1977 goes into the public domain. It is complicated; I guess that's why a flowchart really helps. ha

[Brendan Moody]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

What about the stuff published before 1978, though? Math is not my strong suit, but it seems that, unless there is some legislation to address it, works copyrighted 1923 to 1977 will stay out of the public domain perpetually.

1923 to 1977 works (those that aren't already public domain for various technical reasons) have a set 95-year copyright term from publication. So in fact it's the reverse of what you think: those works will enter the public domain, in the earliest cases very shortly, unless legislation moves the goalposts yet again.

UPDATE: Just saw your update. That is indeed an ugly flowchart. This is a little easier to read: https://copyright.cornell.edu/resour...blicdomain.cfm.

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by Brendan Moody

1923 to 1977 works (those that aren't already public domain for various technical reasons) have a set 95-year copyright term from publication. So in fact it's the reverse of what you think: those works will enter the public domain, in the earliest cases very shortly, unless legislation moves the goalposts yet again.

UPDATE: Just saw your update. That is indeed an ugly flowchart. This is a little easier to read: https://copyright.cornell.edu/resour...blicdomain.cfm.

I was not aware of the 95-year copyright term set for 1923-1977 works. That's a little excessive, for non-corporate works, in my personal opinion. Who collects the royalties or commissions for the oldest of those works--wouldn't it be people like great-grand nieces, 4th cousins 3 times removed, great-great-great grandchildren? They very, very rarely would share in any inheritance that the author left, but they may collect money from his/her book(s)! There's something wrong with that picture.

But, I'm glad that they won't kept out of the public domain perpetually. I'm looking forward to the impending release of some 1923-1977 works into the public domain. I can't tell you the number of times that I have wanted to read a book, but found out that the copyright was in a year like 1924, 1927--some year just past 1922--and so I couldn't read it without either buying a copy or getting the local library to do an interlibrary loan (I try not to do that--the interlibrary loans cost the libraries money and our library system is so badly underfunded) for me.

Oh, the chart that you linked to is very good (BTW--I didn't say that my flow chart was ugly, I just said that it was not particularly attractive. ha). But even though I'm mathematically challenged, I think logically, so the flow chart works better for me. But, your chart sure was prettier. ha

A bit of trivia: I didn't want to give it, earlier, in a post that told about Anne Frank . . . . I read a couple of years ago that Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf is still not in the public domain in the U.S. (I may not even have known before then that it was copyrighted). That surprised me. But after this discussion, I know the reason why. From what you and the charts said, by law it will stay out until after 95 years from the date of copyright (which, without looking it up, would be in the late 1920's or maybe early 1930's). If my calculations are right, it should go into the public domain in the U.S. in about 10 years from now. Incidentally, the book was so popular in Germany, at least, that Hitler became well-off financially from the royalties from sales of it. And, I can't help but wonder who is collecting royalties from it now--maybe one of his distant family members, most of whom changed their last names, if those names had been "Hitler" (or "Hidler") because of the obvious connection with Adolf that people would make .

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

And, I can't help but wonder who is collecting royalties from it now

Google means you no longer have to idly wonder. In Germany, it's the state of Bavaria.