zlacker

[return to "Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books"]
1. krona+AU[view] [source] 2023-02-19 00:53:21
>>GavCo+(OP)
Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered... Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. - George Orwell
◧◩
2. consum+hZ[view] [source] 2023-02-19 01:38:35
>>krona+AU
This Dahl situation seems ridiculous and deserving of derision.

I would also like to bring your attention to the Florida school book ban which applies not just to new editions of one author, but to an entire state's education system.

> Among the titles that have been removed and banned in the course of the vetting in her school district are Toni Morrison’s ‘The Bluest Eye,’ ‘The Kite Runner’ by Khaled Hosseini, ‘The Stranger’ by Albert Camus, ‘Revolting Rhymes’ by Roald Dahl, and a skateboarding magazine called ‘Thrasher’.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/florida-bo...

◧◩◪
3. pessim+N21[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:04:58
>>consum+hZ
Justifying censorship with other censorship is a spiral of doom.
◧◩◪◨
4. dragon+f81[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:47:04
>>pessim+N21
Revisions by the rights-owner are “censorship”, now?
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. pessim+Q81[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:52:16
>>dragon+f81
Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work. Clearly and uncontroversially.

edit: also, a "rights owner" is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work. Granting or transferring exclusive publishing rights to entities that would be willing to censor a work would be a government end-run around prior restraint.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. dragon+La1[view] [source] 2023-02-19 03:12:28
>>pessim+Q81
> Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work.

Is that true when the rights owner (as is often the case) is the author? If it is not (or if it is but it is not problematic) in that case, why would it be if the rights owner is the author's heir, or an entity to whom the author or their heir has voluntarily, whether for value or other reasons, transferred the rights?

> also, a “rights owner” is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work.

Yes, under our copyright system that is, with very rare exceptions, the author, their heirs, or people to who such rights have been transferred by one or the other (and, in the case of transfers by authors, there is even a one-time take-back privilege with a specific time window.)

[go to top]