Thanks for that clarification, Martin. I stand corrected; I misspoke and
really apologize.
Too late now, but indeed I almost added to my original post something
along the lines of "as far as I recall," or some such qualification. I'm
sorry if what I said led anyone astray... -hb
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Martin Zehr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > In response to Hal's remark that the use of the letters is for a
> > "scholarly work, generating little or no profit," that is a distinction
> > without a difference, from a legal perspective. If someone knows about
> the
> > use of their letters, and chooses not to object or pursue a legal remedy,
> > then the legal doctrine of laches kicks in, i.e., the law won't aid
> someone
> > who sits on their rights, assuming they "knew or should have known" their
> > rights were being violated, if they don't object in a reasonable time
> > frame, for a civil case like this, my guess would be about two years, but
> > don't quote me on that.
>
>
>
> > The example that I'm most familiar with is the situation regarding the
> > letters of Willa Cather, who died in 1947. The largest group of her
> > letters still available is located at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
> > her alma mater, and is available for review by scholars. You can describe
> > the contents generally, or even, to a certain extent, paraphrase parts of
> > her letters, but quoting them is strictly verboten, and would likely
> elicit
> > a response from the estate lawyers, or their successors, assigns, etc.
> (I'm
> > not, I assure you, the voice of experience in this regard). It's always
> > the best strategy to make, at the very least, a "good faith" effort to
> > locate the authors of the letters, or representatives of their estate,
> > prior to quoting from them, and to request written permission for
> > quotations.
>
> Martin Zehr
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Hal Bush <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Dear Colleagues; I've read the installments from both Kevin & Joe, and
> > also have now read the material in the book, which just arrived here the
> > other day.
> >
> > First, I hope the issues they bring up will not stop everyone on the LIST
> > from reading the book: this wonderful volume, MT Under Fire, is really
> > just terrific; What a resource!! We are all indebted to Joe for this
> > accomplishment!
> >
> > As for the brouhaha at the Forum, beginning with Kevin's review: those
> are
> > really interesting questions being asked. As for fair use, I think given
> > the fact it is a scholarly work generating little or no profit, it is
> > "legal." Now, whether it is "moral" or "ethical," I cannot say; but I
> > think the material was published in the interest of full disclosure of
> > "family business," so to speak. Personally, I've been around the block
> in
> > the Twain world, with at least 4 week-long visits to Berkeley and 2 long
> > stays at Quarry Farm. And yet I knew nothing about the heart of the
> > charges that Joe's book, and then Kevin, are addressing. I'm not sure
> how
> > comfortable I would have felt about airing those charges by and about
> > scholars still with us--scholars for whom I have the utmost respect and,
> I
> > hope, some friendship. I can also say that the folks at the MT Project
> &
> > Papers, do heroic work, and we are all indebted to them and to Alan. It
> > certainly makes me wonder if these issues came up during the editorial
> > project?? In short: some surprising stuff... but at about pp. 143-45,
> > only 3 pages, a very minor component to an otherwise awesome achievement.
> >
> > So far, the silence on Joe's response, and regarding Kevin's remarks to
> > Joe, is deafening. I think we can all understand why: most of us know
> each
> > other, and we'll be sitting at dinner together in just a few short months
> > in Elmira. Still, some readers on here know me, and my willingness to be
> > blunt -- & frankly, I've felt like I (or someone) probably should say
> > something, for better or worse.
> >
> > And here it is: I have only the highest respect for everyone involved,
> > too. Mainly: MT Under Fire is just a hugely valuable work. And I'm
> > grateful to Joe for writing it; and for Kevin for bringing up those
> > difficult issues. But internal squabbles aside, I hope everyone will
> read
> > the book, and order one for your libraries.
> >
> > --hb
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Prof. Harold K. Bush
> > Professor of English
> > 3800 Lindell
> > Saint Louis University
> > St. Louis, MO 63108
> > 314-977-3616 (w); 314-771-6795 (h)
> > <www.slu.edu/x23809.xml>
> >
>
--
Prof. Harold K. Bush
Professor of English
3800 Lindell
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, MO 63108
314-977-3616 (w); 314-771-6795 (h)
<www.slu.edu/x23809.xml>
|
