Talk:Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc. article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Untitled
editI think King was powerful and still be alive .I hate it when die because of someone else.
An answere was not established in this case
editI changed multiple things in this article as the statements regarding the copyright status were much too strong. When people settle out-of-court it means they have agreed to stop fighting (i.e. paying lawyers) not that the courts have ruled in a fashion that will actually answer the dispute.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 15:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, actually the circuit and appeals court did rule definitely on some of the issues of the case. Just because the case didn't come to final judgment and the parties settled, doesn't mean the court didn't rule on some aspects of the case. (That the court ruled is what induced the parties to settle.) 98.244.3.152 (talk) 18:25, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
The text of the speech, or King's performance?
editThe word "speech" in English can refer either to the text of a speech, or a particular performance of that text. When reading this article (and, for that matter, the original court judgment) I find it difficult to keep track of which is being referred to. Can anyone help to clarify things? THanks. Grover cleveland (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
- I've done my best to clarify the article. Expert assistance would be welcome. Grover cleveland (talk) 21:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926040727/http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19989079.MAN.pdf to http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19989079.MAN.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926040727/http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19989079.MAN.pdf to http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19989079.MAN.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)