Thomas Jefferson famously believed that the dead hand of the past should not hold sway over the present, and was therefore eager that law not overly constrain future generations. That was one reason that he wanted fairly short copyright terms, so that the cultural commons could flourish. (Copyrights originally lasted fourteen years, but now extend for an author’s lifetime plus 70 years!) The perils of long copyright terms can be seen in the egregious case of Stephen Joyce, the 74-year-old grandson of novelist James Joyce and executor of Joyce’s estate. As reported by D.T. Max in The New Yorker (June 19), Stephen Joyce is single-handedly suppressing virtually all new scholarship about Joyce.
Stephen Joyce’s ability to exercise such dictatorial powers over academic commentary and public discussion stem from his control of James Joyce’s copyrights. Stephen has refused to let scholars and librarians publish quotes from letters, which has prevented the publication of biographies and books of literary criticism, and stopped public readings and even a Web audiocast. James Joyce, let it be noted, died sixty-five years ago, in 1941.
To get a taste of how Stephen Joyce wields his authority as executor, consider this reply to a scholar: “Neither I nor the others who manage this estate will touch your hare-brained scheme with a barge pole in any manner, shape or form.” To another, her wrote, “You should consider a new career as a garbage collector in New York City, because you’ll never quote a Joyce text again.” Reporter D.T. Max concludes: “Most prickly literary estates are interested in suppressing unflattering or intrusive information, but no one combines tolltaker, brand enforcer and arbiter of taste as relentlessly as Stephen does, and certain not in such a personal way.”
Robert Spoo used to edit a quarterly journal dedicated to James Joyce, but he quit to become a copyright lawyer. Spoo told Max: “New biographies, digital representations of Joyce’s work, analyses of Joyce’s manuscripts, and, to a lesser extent, criticism – they hardly exist. People have either despaired of doing them… or the demands were so high that they just didn’t feel it was worth continuing the discussions [with Stephen Joyce].”
Max notes the irony that a writer who was so frequently censored should, through his proxy, now aggressively suppress others’ writings, via copyright. (Stephen, you’re doing a great job of honoring your grandfather’s memory!)
It is thrilling to think that Stephen Joyce may soon get his comeuppance. Carol Loeb Shloss, a Stanford English professor, published a life of James Joyce’s mentally ill aunt, Lucia, in 2003, but was forced to expurgate much of the material after Stephen Joyce threatened Shloss’ publisher. Now, with the help of Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig, Shloss plans to post the expurgated material on a website, in defiance of Stephen Joyce, in order to test and affirm the right of fair use. The factual circumstances are particularly attractive for any potential lawsuit brought against Loeb because she has no commercial motive. The purpose of the website is entirely to aid scholars and researchers, which is the classic goal of fair use.
“If a copyright holder misbehaves, we want people to know it’s not costless,” Lessig said. Stephen Joyce’s litigation and threats against scholars have been greatly assisted by the $300,000 – 400,000 in annual revenues generated by the estate, but now Lessig and his team of lawyers have signaled their own determination to vindicate the fair use rights of authors. Thomas Jefferson would have understood; as he once wrote, “The earth and its usufruct belong to the living.”