|
''Wright v. Warner Books'' (1991) was a case in which the widow of the author Richard Wright (1908-1960) claimed that his biographer, the poet and writer Margaret Walker (1915-1998), had infringed copyright by using content from some of Wright's unpublished letters and journals. The court took into account the recent ruling in ''Salinger v. Random House, Inc.'' (1987), which had found that a copyright owner had the right to control first publication, but found in favor of Walker after weighing all factors. The case had broad implications by allowing the use library special collections for academic research. ==Background== Margaret Walker, who had been a friend of Richard Wright, decided to write his biography. In her first version she made extensive use of unpublished letters in her possession, letters to Wright's translator Margrit de Sablonière〔(James Campbell, "Black American in Paris", ) ''The Nation'', September 27, 2004.〕 and an unpublished journal by Wright that had been sold to Yale University for $175,000 for use in scholarly research, as well as of Wright's published work. She also used Wright's unpublished manuscript "I Choose Exile", held by the Kent State University library. In 1984 Walker's publisher at the time asked Wright's widow, Ellen Wright, for permission to use the material in which she held the copyright. Ellen Wright refused. Walker changed publishers twice, and revised the biography extensively to make much less use of the unpublished material, avoiding direct quotation wherever possible. Warner Books published this new version with the title ''Richard Wright Daemonic Genius'' in November 1988 despite objections from Ellen Wright. Ellen Wright brought a lawsuit in which she claimed copyright infringement and breach of contract. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Wright v. Warner Books, Inc.」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|