This story is a real outrage:

Homes & Gardens of November 1938 showed off Hitler’s fashionable home. Homes & Gardens of 2003 would rather kill the story than apologize….
It is frankly sickening that Homes & Gardens should display concern for its copyrighted material rather than contrition for its endorsement of a monster. This is a great story for the blogosphere.

It sure is!
Once again, we see the copyright laws being used to stifle free speech — this time an important discussion of the copyright holder’s Nazi-glamorizing role in history.
Outrageous. If the bastards can get away with this, then I say we take on the damned copyright laws. Get rid of them, rewrite them, defy them by means of civil disobedience followed by First Amendment litigation all the way to the Supreme Court. This country’s founding fathers were very uneasy about interfering with the free flow of ideas. Thomas Jefferson feared the very abuse we see here: monopolists using state-granted power to control the flow of ideas.
Don’t just read this; read the Flea’s whole piece, and then do something!
UPDATE: Lest anyone think there are no lessons to be drawn from Homes and Gardens’ publicity romp with Hitler (or other “ancient history”), Instapundit supplies a more modern example of media gullibility — John Burns’ (New York Times Pulitzer Prize-winner) report (via John Leo) that:

the vast majority of correspondents in prewar Iraq played ball with Saddam and downplayed the viciousness of the regime.

Well! I just hope the reports they filed are copyrighted! What if Americans read them and got the wrong idea?
UPDATE: Lynn at Reflections in d minor supplies a link to view JPEGs of the actual Homes & Gardens Hitler sycophancy piece, as well as links to the other intrepid bloggers who won’t let Homes & Gardens get away with this perversion of the copyright laws.