Should publications of war criminals be protected by copyright?
The professor of modern German history at the university of London wrote a controversial historical biography of Hitler’s minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels. The actual issue was that he used Goebbels’s diaries information without paying to the copyright’s owner. After the biography book got published by Random house, the family of Joseph Goebbels sued the publishing company, asking for compensation under the copyright laws. Random house agreed to pay 1% of the net retail price; however, they were against the idea of paying and they stated that “no money should go to a war criminal” and “If you accept that a private person controls the rights to Goebbels’ diaries, then — theoretically — you give this person the right to control research” (Alberge, 2015).
The controversial ethical issue here is based on copyrights; therefore, let’s discuss the key purpose of the copyright laws. “Copyright is the exclusive and transferable legal right given to the originator of creative works, and assigns exclusive right to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material” (Ashley, 2013). In other words, the creator owns his piece and if someone needs to use the copyrighted work he should cite and give credits to the owner. Primarily, “the aim of copyrights is to promote the progress of science and useful arts and to assure authors exclusive rights to their original expression” (Ashley, 2013). Copyright law guard new ideas and encourage people to create creative works and generate new pieces. In order to achieve its purpose copyright law seek to protect: “Literary works, Musical works, Dramatic works, Motion picture and audio visual works, Photographs and Sound recordings” (ashley, 2013). However, this protection does not last forever and it expires after a fixed number of years.
First, in order to evaluate whether publications of the Goebbels diary can be compared to any other publication, let’s discuss how was the Nazis propagandist living. “In January 1933, Hitler became the German chancellor, and in March of that year he appointed Goebbels the country’s minister for public enlightenment and propaganda” (Palmieri, 2010). Goebbels supported Hitler’s plan of eliminating every human being that was different: Jews, Slavs, gypsies and homosexuals. In addition, Hitler admired the Goebbels writing skills and he gave him the power over all German newspapers, books, magazines and movies. “His mission was to censor all opposition to Hitler and present the chancellor and the Nazi Party in the most positive light while stirring up hatred for Jewish people” (Palmieri, 2010). Not only did he remove all creative and literal content that oppose Hitler’s philosophy, “but also he was a guiding force in the burning of “un-German” books in a public ceremony at Berlin’s Opera House” (Palmieri, 2010). Therefore, Goebbels in an indirect way or even direct way killed millions of innocent people. The families of these guiltless causalities deserve to know the reason behind this massacre and what was the criminal thinking when he killed their relatives, they deserve to know the truth behind this painful history. Therefore, they should have access to his journal and should be owned by the government and not to the family of the criminal.
Additionally, these diaries can have an important role in knowing the history of Germany, the Nazis and the world war. It includes historical pieces of element and not only literature. Goebbels diary should not enjoy the same legal protection as other creative works because it includes significant historical facts and evidence of the actual historical events. Knowing the importance of Hitler’s reign in the world of history and the importance of the tactics and methods used in the world of wars, those diaries cannot be compared to any creative copyrighted work. Therefore, it is logical that the diaries will be used by professionals such as historians and psychologists in order to understand how Hitler and his assistants were successful in unjustly ruling back at the time. The historical aspect of these diaries makes them too vital to be in the sole custody of one person only (specially the relative of the criminal) and should be controlled by the government and they should also be placed in the historical archives.
As we explained, the diaries can help the public in two ways, either as a historical evidence or as a source of information for the families of the victims. According to Stim (2017), the dissemination of facts or information that benefits the public have more leeway such as copies from factual works and biographies. Therefore, in this case the court should have thought of the importance of this diary to the public and not consider it a normal copyright case. Moreover, the judges usually consider four factors, one of them is “the purpose of the use” (Stim, 2017), and in this case the purpose was sharing important historical and educationally information by a professor.
In summary, considering the historical importance of these diaries and the harm that Goebbels caused to the victims and their families, this publication should not be compared to any other publication of copyrighted work. Additionally, the government should control these diaries and place them in the historical archives.
References
Alberge, D. (2015, April 18). Random House told it should pay to quote Joseph Goebbels in biography. Retrieved April 16, 2018, from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/apr/18/random-house-told-it-should-pay-to-quote-joseph-goebbels-in-biography
Packard, Ashley (2013) ‘Invasion of Privacy’ in Digital Media Law, Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ, p. 176.
Palmieri, C. (2010). Joseph Goebbels. History. A&E television networks. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/joseph-goebbels
Stim, R. (2017). Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors. https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/
