Delphine Ménard wrote:
On 4/20/07, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) wrote:
Given that moral rights include the right to attribution and the right to object to modification of one's work (independently of copyright and even after the transfer or expiry of copyright)*, and given that a significant portion of the English-speaking world recognizes moral rights, does this mean that the copyright policy and definition require impossible freedoms?
This is exactly what came to my mind when reading the bit Birgitte pointed out.
The part that says: "regardless of the intent and purpose of such modifications. " seems to be at best an ideal, at worst requiring the impossible, considering all you pointed out.
I would very much like to see how the courts have interpreted moral rights, and how far they are prepared to go in applying them. They are at least very weak in the United States where they have accepted parody as fair use.
Also if moral rights are to continue in perpetuity, who has a right of action. If someone were to publish a pornographic version of the correspondence between Héloise and Abelard who would be in a position to file a complaint about them. They are not known to have any descendants. Perhaps the Catholic Church? :-)
Ec