Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The paper examines the production of secondary-school textbooks published between 1992 and 2019 that address the Soviet history of Kazakhstan. It argues that textbook authors exercise agency when discussing Kazakhstan's participation in the Second World War. While some authors focus squarely on the heroism of Kazakhs and the Kazakh nation's contribution to the final victory, others build upon this narrative by discussing the human losses incurred and the experiences of ordinary people. This article contributes to studies looking at portrayals of World War II in post-Soviet countries' history textbooks.

It has been argued by numerous writers that Canadians are no longer culturally & educationally autonomous. During 1972 & 1973, requests were sent to 52 departments of sociology & to 52 departments of political science in English-language Canadian Us, obtaining respectively 20 & 17 responses, for lists of all books required for courses, obtaining a list of 3,289 political science & 2,195 sociology texts, with substantial duplicate listings. Of texts used, 55% were published in the US by non-Canadian authors; 31% were by Canadian authors, largely published in Canada. Discipline, course level, region, & type of U are analyzed to determine effects on selection. In the aggregate, Canadian departments of sociology & political science, regardless of other variables, have a strong proclivity to use American texts. 12 Tables. W. H. Stoddard.

In recent years numerous critics, generally those with strong nationalist inclinations, have attempted to demonstrate that Canadians are no longer autonomous in cultural and educational pursuits. Whether or not such autonomy ever existed to any substantial degree, especially for non-French Canada, might itself be disputed. Indeed, a good case can be put forward for the proposition that the gradual diminution of British practices, norms, and expertise in many facets of Canadian education, if not in Canadian culture generally, was accompanied by a concomitant increase in American practices, publications, and personnel rather than by any emerging period of distinctly Canadian expression. That most of the substantial Americanization in postsecondary education and many other areas was occasioned by Canadian invitation tends, however, to be widely ignored. Be that as it may, most critics now prefer to focus on the actual state of affairs and the continuing trends rather than on historical causes.

The changing relationship between authors and publishers was a phenomenon related to the model of modern book publishing business which began to emerge in Lithuania Major, as well as throughout much of Central and Eastern Europe in the early 19th century. The topic of this research is the legal framework established in 1830 as part of Russian censorship laws intended to regulate property rights of authors and publishers, which was also applied in the occupied territory of Lithuania. Different sources and methods were used in this article to answer to the following questions: "How were the rights and obligations of authors and publishers understood in documents regulating publishing activities in Lithuania Major in the first decades of the 19th century (i.e. before 1830)?"; "How was this concept legitimized in the first legal enactments regulating copyrights (i.e. after the introduction of regulations)?"; "How were these mutually useful relationships reflected in Lithuanian book publishing before the Russian occupational government imposed radical measures to restrict Lithuanian national culture and publishing in 1864?" The main sources of data were the 19th century official and unofficial documents regulating publishing activities (including, most importantly, the censorship laws of the time) and archival materials documenting the activities of Lithuanian private publishers and book authors of the time, such as correspondence and documentation on the activities of publishing institutions.

The changing relationship between authors and publishers was a phenomenon related to the model of modern book publishing business which began to emerge in Lithuania Major, as well as throughout much of Central and Eastern Europe in the early 19th century. The topic of this research is the legal framework established in 1830 as part of Russian censorship laws intended to regulate property rights of authors and publishers, which was also applied in the occupied territory of Lithuania. Different sources and methods were used in this article to answer to the following questions: "How were the rights and obligations of authors and publishers understood in documents regulating publishing activities in Lithuania Major in the first decades of the 19th century (i.e. before 1830)?"; "How was this concept legitimized in the first legal enactments regulating copyrights (i.e. after the introduction of regulations)?"; "How were these mutually useful relationships reflected in Lithuanian book publishing before the Russian occupational government imposed radical measures to restrict Lithuanian national culture and publishing in 1864?" The main sources of data were the 19th century official and unofficial documents regulating publishing activities (including, most importantly, the censorship laws of the time) and archival materials documenting the activities of Lithuanian private publishers and book authors of the time, such as correspondence and documentation on the activities of publishing institutions.

The changing relationship between authors and publishers was a phenomenon related to the model of modern book publishing business which began to emerge in Lithuania Major, as well as throughout much of Central and Eastern Europe in the early 19th century. The topic of this research is the legal framework established in 1830 as part of Russian censorship laws intended to regulate property rights of authors and publishers, which was also applied in the occupied territory of Lithuania. Different sources and methods were used in this article to answer to the following questions: "How were the rights and obligations of authors and publishers understood in documents regulating publishing activities in Lithuania Major in the first decades of the 19th century (i.e. before 1830)?"; "How was this concept legitimized in the first legal enactments regulating copyrights (i.e. after the introduction of regulations)?"; "How were these mutually useful relationships reflected in Lithuanian book publishing before the Russian occupational government imposed radical measures to restrict Lithuanian national culture and publishing in 1864?" The main sources of data were the 19th century official and unofficial documents regulating publishing activities (including, most importantly, the censorship laws of the time) and archival materials documenting the activities of Lithuanian private publishers and book authors of the time, such as correspondence and documentation on the activities of publishing institutions.

The changing relationship between authors and publishers was a phenomenon related to the model of modern book publishing business which began to emerge in Lithuania Major, as well as throughout much of Central and Eastern Europe in the early 19th century. The topic of this research is the legal framework established in 1830 as part of Russian censorship laws intended to regulate property rights of authors and publishers, which was also applied in the occupied territory of Lithuania. Different sources and methods were used in this article to answer to the following questions: "How were the rights and obligations of authors and publishers understood in documents regulating publishing activities in Lithuania Major in the first decades of the 19th century (i.e. before 1830)?"; "How was this concept legitimized in the first legal enactments regulating copyrights (i.e. after the introduction of regulations)?"; "How were these mutually useful relationships reflected in Lithuanian book publishing before the Russian occupational government imposed radical measures to restrict Lithuanian national culture and publishing in 1864?" The main sources of data were the 19th century official and unofficial documents regulating publishing activities (including, most importantly, the censorship laws of the time) and archival materials documenting the activities of Lithuanian private publishers and book authors of the time, such as correspondence and documentation on the activities of publishing institutions.

A brief overview of Erich Loest's life, a prolific writer, who meddles in political controversies when he sees fit and even at 80 years of age has not slowed down. He recently published "Sommergewitter" (Summer Thunderstorms) about the 1950s in the GDR.

One key objective of copyright is to grant exclusive rights to authors and creators to enable them to reap the full value of their creations. As a consequence, they should be able to transfer or license their rights to persons and companies more apt to exploit them commercially, thereby earning some revenues from such exploitation. Both United States and the European Union recognize the creator as the primary copyright owner. Because copyright is transferable, at least the economic rights, the work can transform into an economic asset whose rights are acquired by producers, publishers or other economic actors whose purpose is to make it available on the market. The creation then becomes a book, a film, a music album, a play. In most cases, producers and publishers take the risk and investment needed for the work to yield some revenue and provide access to the market for authors. The first modern copyright law, the U.K. Statute of Anne, recognized early on this reality, as its first provisions already mentioned the author and publisher side by side. Therefore, one of the first relevant acts accomplished by the author, after the creation itself, is to entrust someone else to commercially exploit her rights, hence to give up some part of control over her work. This first contract may be a tricky episode for creators as they will in most cases be in a weaker bargaining position, due to their inexperience, lack of information or desire to be published or produced at any cost. Conversely, commercial undertakings exploiting musical, audiovisual, literary or other works are generally better equipped—and more accustomed—than individual creators to draft contracts that protect their interests. The increasing concentration in the economic sector of entertainment and media strengthens even more their bargaining power and their possibility to impose unilateral and standard exploitation contracts that tend more and more to be so-called "adhesion contracts," that are proposed to authors with no real margin for negotiation, on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. As cultural markets are considered by economists to be winner-take-all markets, they hold a great part of risk for creators and commercial exploiters alike, a risk that has even been increased in the digital environment with the piracy threat. As a result, only a few creators can earn a sufficient income out of their creation and it has been estimated that the top ten percent of the U.K. creators get about sixty to eighty percent of the total income of the creative profession. It will come as no surprise that, on average, incomes of creators are well below the median income. The current economic situation of creators in Europe, who will be directly affected by austerity policies and the ensuing reduction of culture funding, might further increase their vulnerability. The same could be said of countries outside of the European Union. The European Union has so far declined to harmonize the legal provisions aimed at protecting creators in the contracts they enter into, the matter being left to Member States. Some (e.g. Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain or Italy) have a detailed and protective set of legal provisions aimed at rebalancing the bargaining power between the creator and her publisher/producer. Other countries have no rules at all (e.g. U.K.) or only partial ones (e.g. Denmark). The legal protection that exists in some countries consists of default and mandatory rules that copyright contracts should comply with: they deal with transferability of rights (including the issue of moral rights), required formalities, restrictions on transfer of rights, obligations to specify the scope, duration, territorial scope and remuneration of the transfer, obligations of exploitation imposed to the person acquiring the rights, interpretation rules, and termination or revision of contract. Some specific provisions also apply to contracts applicable to defined categories of works, such as publishing contracts for literary works, production contracts for audiovisual works, etc. Additionally, the general rules of contract law can be used to confer more protection to the authors. As the area of contract law is less harmonized in the European Union, the rules will differ greatly from one Member State to the other, but could include the principles of good faith, fairness or equity, the prohibition of unfair terms, some principles of interpretation of contracts, the recourse to usage, etc. This paper is based on a study commissioned in 2013 by the European Parliament to assess the situation of European creators and the contractual protection conferred to them by E.U. Member States. Part I rapidly summarizes the legal provisions existing in some European countries that protect authors when transferring their copyright. Part II zooms out of the specific rules regulating the copyright contracts to draw the overall context of exploitation of creative works and of its many actors to challenge the central role that such national laws confer to the first contract entered upon between the creator and her publisher or producer. This insufficiency is illustrated by selected issues for which these specific rules are incapable to provide a satisfactory solution or protection to the author. Part III offers a conclusion in the form of some recommendations for a better treatment of creators when transferring their rights for exploitation of their works. These recommendations take into account the broader picture of exploitation of creative content and the shortcomings of the current legal provisions, when they exist.

Volume 3: Authors, Publishers and Copyright LawVolume 3 IntroductionBibliographyPart 1. AUTHORS, PUBLISHERS AND AGENTS⁰́₈Books, Booksellers and Bookmakers⁰́₉, London Magazine, Vol. 10 (February 1828), pp. 254-60.⁰́₈Authors and Publishers⁰́₉, The New Quarterly Review and Digest of Current Literature, British, American, French, and German (January 1854), pp. 9-17.⁰́₈Introduction⁰́₉, The Search for a Publisher; or, Counsels for a Young Author (1855; London: Provost & Co., repr. 1882), pp. 3-19.James Spedding, Publishers and Authors (London: Printed for the Author by John Russell Smith, 1867), pp. 1-55.⁰́₈An Interview with Mr A.P. Watt⁰́₉, Bookman (October 1892), pp. 20-2.William Heinemann, ⁰́₈The Middleman as Viewed by a Publisher⁰́₉, Athenaeum (11 November 1893), p. 663T. Werner Laurie, ⁰́₈Author, Agent, and Publisher by one of "The Trade"⁰́₉, Nineteenth Century (November 1895), pp. 890-5.Walter Besant, 'The Literary Agent', Nineteenth Century (December 1895), 979-86.Robert Buchanan, Is Barabbas a Necessity? A Discourse on Publishers and Publishing (London: Robert Buchanan, Author & Publisher, 1896), pp. 3-31.Part 2. AUTHORS, PUBLISHERS AND COPYRIGHT LAWRobert Maugham, extract from A Treatise on the Law of Literary Property (London and Edinburgh: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green; Henry Dixon; Adam Black, 1828), pp. vii-xviii. ⁰́₈The Copy-Right Law⁰́₉, Monthly Review (January 1838), pp. 52-63.W. and R. Chambers, ⁰́₈Brief Objections to Mr Talfourd⁰́₉s New Copyright Bill⁰́₉, Times (25 April 1838), p. 3.Letter from Robert Chambers to the Times (18 May 1838), p. 3.⁰́₈New Copyright Bill⁰́₉, Times (31 May 1838), p. 4.[Routledge v Low], ⁰́₈Literary and Musical Copyright⁰́₉, Athenaeum (16 December 1865), pp. 845-6.John Camden Hotten, extracts from Literary Copyright: Seven Letters Addressed by Permission to the Right Hon. The Earl Stanhope (London: John Camden Hotten, 1871), pp. 15-46, 91-102, 135-55 Matthew Arnold, ⁰́₈Copyright⁰́₉, Fortnightly Review (March 1880), 319-34.Edward Marston, extract from Copyright, National and International: with some remarks on the position of authors and publishers by a publisher (London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle & Rivington, 1887), pp. 5-44.Charles James Longman, ⁰́₈A Publisher⁰́₉s View of International Copyright⁰́₉, Fraser⁰́₉s Magazine (March 1881), pp. 372-8.Wilkie Collins, ⁰́₈Thou Shalt Not Steal⁰́₉, Author 2 (June 1890), pp. 31-5.C. J. Longman, ⁰́₈The American Copyright Bill⁰́₉, Economic Review (April 1891), pp. 203-8.G. Herbert Thring, ⁰́₈Recent Attempts at Copyright Legislation⁰́₉, Fortnightly Review (March 1898), pp. 461-7.Augustine Birrell, ⁰́₈The Present Situation⁰́₉, in Seven Lectures on the Law and History of Copyright in Books (London: Cassell & Co., 1899), pp. 205-23.Part 3. PUBLISHERS AND THE SOCIETY OF AUTHORSExtracts from The Grievances Between Authors and Publishers. Being the Report of the Conferences of the Incorporated Society of Authors held at Willis⁰́₉s Rooms, in March 1887 with Additional Matter and Summary (London: Field & Tuer; Simpkin, Marshall & Co., Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1887), pp. 7-46, 52-61, 127-85.⁰́₈The Mysteries of Publishing: An Interview with Messrs Chatto and Windus⁰́₉, Pall Mall Gazette (9 March 1887), pp. 1-2.J. Neville Porter, ⁰́₈The Relations Between Authors and Publishers⁰́₉, Time (1887), pp. 399-411.⁰́₈Archdeacon Farrar and the Publishers⁰́₉, correspondence from the Times, 7-14 October 1890. [Letter from J. Russell Endean, 7 October; letters from F.W. Farrar and Cassell and Company, 8 October; letters from Walter Besant, F.W. Farrar and J Russell Endean, 9 October); letter from Andrew W. Tuer, 10 October; letters from An Author, Harry Quilter, and E. Marston, 11 October; letters from Walter Besant, S.S. Sprigge, and Facing Both Ways, 13 October; letters from George Lock and Andrew W. Tuer, 14 October]. Extracts from William Heinemann (ed.), The Hardships of Publishing: Letters to ⁰́₈The Athenaeum⁰́₉ (London: Privately Printed, 1893), pp. 3-28; 30-32; 42-57; 59-62; 95-113. Walter Besant, extracts from The Pen and the Book (London: Thomas Burleigh, 1899), pp. 145-86, 200-13.⁰́₈Am I a Thief? A Publisher⁰́₉s Reply to Sir Walter Besant⁰́₉, article and correspondence published in Outlook (Original article, 14 January; Letters by Walter Besant, Another Publisher, Thomas Pinkerton, 21 January; Letter by Another Publisher, 28 January; Letters by A Publisher, A London Bookseller, 11 February 1899). Index