Patrice Emery Lumumba
In his house
Stanleyville (Kisangani), May 1960
Photograph posted here under “fair use” doctrine
Photo by Dr D’Lynn Waldron
I must state this off the bat, just in case Dr D’Lynn Waldron contemplates suing me for reposting the photo above. Section 107 of Chapter 1 of Title 17, U.S. Code pertaining to copyright law is titled “Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use.”
It states:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.”
It goes without saying that, in
This being said, here’s my problem with Dr D’Lynn Waldron. This past month of May, while doing some research on the net for the 50th anniversary of DRC Independence, I came across 6 photos I’ve never seen before of Lumumba taken by Dr D’Lynn Waldron in May 1960—that is, 50 years ago. The interest of these 6 photographs lies in the fact that they capture an unguarded Lumumba at his home and in his neighborhood of Stanleyville (changed to Kisangani by Mobutu)—my hometown, incidentally.
Here’s an excerpt of the email I sent Dr Waldron on May 28, 2010, asking for her permission to use these 6 pictures:
“Dear Dr Waldron:
I'm a (...) blogger (…). I stumbled on your trove of stunning pictures of Lumumba today. Could you allow me to use them on my blog with full credits attributed to you? There’s also a fountain-pain signature and a scribbled rhetorical question Lumumba asked you that I'd like to use. I live in the Washington DC area and if you happen to be in this area, could you share with me your memories of the man? Otherwise, could I email you the few questions I'd like to ask you about Lumumba?”
The next day (May 29), Dr Waldron answered me as follows (excerpt): “I would have to see what you are writing before I can give permission to be associated with your blog.” I wasn’t asking Dr Waldron “to be associated with [my] blog” but to grant me permission to use 6 photographs taken over 5 decades ago and if possible to “share with me [her] memories of the man [Lumumba].”
At any rate, I promptly replied to Dr Waldron on the same day giving her the web addresses of my two blogs (the English and the French blogs) while informing her that I am a “native of Kisangani” and suggesting the impact the photos could have in the month of May 2010—as she took these pictures in May 1960: “It'd be so eerily powerful if I were to use your photos before the end of this month of May as you took them in May 1960!”
Having not received any reply from Dr Waldron by May 30, I sent her another email:
“You still haven't responded to my request for an interview about your encounter with Lumumba in May 1960 and about the use of your photographs. The Cinquantenaire (50th anniversary) of Congo's independence is about to be celebrated this month of June and you are part of that history--like it or not. Your encounter with Lumumba, the man, is a unique experience and thus constitutes a critical part of that history. It is therefore important that you share this material and your recollection with the Congolese people.
So, please, Dear Dr Waldron, respond to this request.
Yours respectfully…”
On June 2, Dr Waldron made this reply to me:
“On May 29th, I replied to your e-mail of May 28th and I attach that exchange of e-mails below.
You made no mention of an interview then and the content and tone of this e-mail is entirely different from your e-mail of May 28th.
You did not answer my questions about your trip or your blog
I [do] not give interviews and you have not received permission to use any of my materials.”
Well, my email might have somehow gotten lost in some cyber recesses—though my email account still claims the email was sent and delivered. And what have my trips to do with the permission to use the photographs? Besides, if you reread my opening email to Dr Waldron, I specifically asked her to “share with me [her] memories of the man”—which, in other words, is an interview request…
Indefatigable, I replied the same day:
“Dr Waldron:Since then, total silence from Dr Waldron!
I can't use your materials without your permission. On May 29, I answered your query. In fact, immediately after receiving your reply. I don't understand how you couldn't have received my email.
Below is the reply I wrote to you on May 29. I'm pasting it from the outbox of my email account. Please let me (…) know if you get this one...”
I never really understood the point the anti-copyright movement was attempting to make in fighting for the abolition of copyright laws. Until this silly exchange with Dr D’Lynn Waldron. Dr Waldron is certainly entitled to her intellectual property rights. But I find that this unnecessary hoarding of copyrights for 6 pictures of a Congolese national hero I just wanted to use in celebrating the 50th anniversary of a nation amounts to depriving an entire nation of its historical and cultural rights to information… and a shameful exercise in utter futility!
0 comments:
Post a Comment