The latest news on 'To Kill a Mockingbird' shows how big corporations control copyright law; Los Angeles Times, 3/14/16

Michael Hiltzik, Los Angeles Times; The latest news on 'To Kill a Mockingbird' shows how big corporations control copyright law:

"According to a March 4 notice issued by Hachette to booksellers and reported by the New Republic, permission for the mass-market edition has been withdrawn by the novel's publisher, HarperCollins. (HarperCollins also brought out "Go Set a Watchman.") Hachette can sell off its remaining copies, which it's doing at a further discount, but henceforth "Mockingbird" will be available chiefly in a HarperCollins trade paperback edition, which lists for $14.99.

The burden will fall on school districts that traditionally laid in a large volume of mass-market books for their pupils. Hachette says that more than two-thirds of the 30 million copies sold worldwide since publication have been its low-priced edition. Hachette told bookstores, according to the New Republic: "The disappearance of the iconic mass-market edition is very disappointing to us, especially as we understand this could force a difficult situation for schools and teachers with tight budgets who cannot afford the larger, higher priced paperback edition that will remain in the market."

The real problem this development points to is with copyright law, which has been getting consistently rewritten in the United States and other countries to extend the length of authors' rights to the point where their heirs, and heirs of heirs, are the chief beneficiaries of the copyright. But that's only superficially. The real beneficiaries are corporations, which continue to profit from successful works of art for decades after their creators have passed on. Corporations such as HarperCollins...

Yet as we can see from the extinction of the mass-market paperback of "Mockingbird," such extensions stifle the dissemination of creative works rather than encourage it. The squabble over the copyright to Anne Frank's diaries, which we reported on here, also illustrates how the grip of copyright law leaves the control of creative works in the hands of people who may not share the desires of the works' creators. Harper Lee has passed on, Anne Frank is long gone, and Walt Disney is represented in the marketplace by a corporation that is hopelessly far removed from his artistic and even his business creation."

Putting Lincoln Online Is No Easy Political Task; New York Times, 3/12/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Putting Lincoln Online Is No Easy Political Task:

"One of the most ambitious research projects on Abraham Lincoln ever attempted — giving scholars, history buffs and students online access to every document Lincoln ever wrote or read — is being threatened by an absurd and intractable political and budget morass in the Illinois statehouse.

Someone — Gov. Bruce Rauner, perhaps — had better cut through the mess soon to guarantee the continued operation of the long-running, nationally respected project before Illinois becomes the Land of Lost Lincolniana. Managers of the project, the Papers of Abraham Lincoln, warn that it is being starved of money, with five of its 12 staff scholars already cut and its future in considerable doubt.

The digitization project, eagerly supported by Lincoln specialists and private donors, has so far found, annotated and published scores of thousands of freshly uncovered documents, adding to the universe of Lincoln materials. It began in the 1980s researching Lincoln’s legal career, then grew far bigger in scope as the Internet arrived. It will be “the Grand Central of all things Lincoln,” says Harold Holzer, a Lincoln scholar and writer concerned about its future."