US copyrights will now last.. forever
-
Roger Wright wrote: Conservative if Conservative actually meant constitutionalist instead of corporatist, moralistic Federalist, i'd wear the label proudly. but it doesn't. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
You're dead right. Moralism has no place in our country, nor does any favoritism for corporations. We are supposed to be a melting pot, drawing upon the diversity of the world for the best each culture has to offer, and I favor that. Unfortunately, we're given the choice every 4 years to select leaders who either want big business to run our lives, or those who want to tax the life out of the few productive people left here to give handouts to the worthless. I'm registered Republican, not because I believe in the principals they espouse, but because the Democrats have values that are far more noxious. I wish there was a party that truly represented the values America is supposed to stand for, but one has yet to be born...:(( Wouldn't it be fun to have a time machine, just to bring James Madison, Tom Jefferson, et al forward to get their opinion of what we've become? I wonder what changes they'd incorporate in their Constitution after seeing us as we are now!:-D I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
-
You're dead right. Moralism has no place in our country, nor does any favoritism for corporations. We are supposed to be a melting pot, drawing upon the diversity of the world for the best each culture has to offer, and I favor that. Unfortunately, we're given the choice every 4 years to select leaders who either want big business to run our lives, or those who want to tax the life out of the few productive people left here to give handouts to the worthless. I'm registered Republican, not because I believe in the principals they espouse, but because the Democrats have values that are far more noxious. I wish there was a party that truly represented the values America is supposed to stand for, but one has yet to be born...:(( Wouldn't it be fun to have a time machine, just to bring James Madison, Tom Jefferson, et al forward to get their opinion of what we've become? I wonder what changes they'd incorporate in their Constitution after seeing us as we are now!:-D I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
well looky there. here i am agreeing with you now. :) :beer: -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
Darn... I was almost done with my masterpiece featuring the Hunchback of Notre Dame and the Little Mermaid.:(( All that work for nothing... I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Roger Wright wrote: the Hunchback of Notre Dame and the Little Mermaid Sounds a bit crooked and wet to me...
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa -
Darn... I was almost done with my masterpiece featuring the Hunchback of Notre Dame and the Little Mermaid.:(( All that work for nothing... I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Some samples of your work to show us :rolleyes: ? You just don't have to use specifically Disney's way of representating these characters, do you :confused: ? Otherwise, I don't think Andersen or Hugo will sue you (perhaps their descendants) :~ ?
Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop
-
The purpose of copyright law and patent law was originally to promote innovation by allowing the inventor/author a time during which (s)he could derive exclusive benefit from the idea or product. At the end of that period of exclusion, the property right was to pass to society so that all might benefit from it. This ruling defeats the purpose of the law, and while it does extend personal property interests ( a good thing, I agree), it does nothing to benefit the general population. Innovation builds upon the works of others. I don't recall who said it, but it has been said that, "If I have seen further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." Shame on me for forgetting the author (it's still copyrighted I guess), but the vision contained within that statement gives clear insight into the process by which this nation became great. To prohibit future visionaries from building upon the innovations of the past, be it in the arts or the sciences, is to cripple the nation and the world. Such interpretations of the law condemn future generations to re-inventing the wheel. I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Roger Wright wrote: I don't recall who said it, but it has been said that, "If I have seen further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." Shame on me for forgetting the author (it's still copyrighted I guess)... I don't know Sir Isaac Newton was English and part of a Communistic Monarchy. So he wouldn't have benefited from all the amazingly good things that are American. ;P Michael Martin Australia mjm68@tpg.com.au "I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end." - Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
-
Stan Shannon wrote: I would also argue that something such as copy-right law is well within the legislative authority granted to congress by the constitution and i wouldn't argue. my problem with this is that Disney and pals wrote and purchased (and i mean both literally and can provide references) the latest law to extend copyrights. one could argue that it's good to have strong businesses like Disney pumping americas economy. but at the same time, these laws prohibit any new companies from developing the same way Disney did (by exploiting new ways of presenting public domain content - children's stories in cartoon form) because there will be no more public domain content, if Disney has their way. so, it's easy to see why Disney wants this: it continues their own copyrights and it effectively prevents others from getting into their content repackaging business (if that content was written after 1920). -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
Chris Losinger wrote: because there will be no more public domain content, if Disney has their way. so, it's easy to see why Disney wants this but does it really matter. Whilst I agree Disney will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes. Do we need public domain content whilst we still have imaginations. Okay so we can't redo Steam Boat Willy (Although as Mickey Mouse is trademarked, copyright wouldn't be the issue here). We can still write all our own stories using our own characters and situations. Why would I want to write a story about Donald Duck when I could quiet easily write a story about a Penguin with a speech impediment instead. Creating new original content rather than repackaging other peoples crap is surely the way forward. Michael You gotta roll with it You gotta take your time You gotta say what you say Don't let anybody get in your way - Oasis
-
It's been over two hundred years since we had a good revolution. We're overdue. I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Yes, but what new ideas would we unite around? The left is inherently Marxist, the Right is overwhelmingly religious zealots of one type or another. The problem is people who get bent out of shape over this Copyright ruling (which does not represent any abuse of the constitution even though it does expose weaknesses in our system ) will turn a blind eye to constitutional travisties such as Roe v. Wade. What do we unite around? "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Roger Wright wrote: Conservative if Conservative actually meant constitutionalist instead of corporatist, moralistic Federalist, i'd wear the label proudly. but it doesn't. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
But Chris, this ruling is not an abuse of the Constitution. It may indicate needed reforms in our government, but it hardly represents a gross violation of the constitution. I would happily join in just about any revolution to overthrow the government you guys could come up with just for the hell of it. But I have serious doubts about how we could actually improve the system. We need both the Constitution and capitalism - they are the two sides of the same coin. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
You're dead right. Moralism has no place in our country, nor does any favoritism for corporations. We are supposed to be a melting pot, drawing upon the diversity of the world for the best each culture has to offer, and I favor that. Unfortunately, we're given the choice every 4 years to select leaders who either want big business to run our lives, or those who want to tax the life out of the few productive people left here to give handouts to the worthless. I'm registered Republican, not because I believe in the principals they espouse, but because the Democrats have values that are far more noxious. I wish there was a party that truly represented the values America is supposed to stand for, but one has yet to be born...:(( Wouldn't it be fun to have a time machine, just to bring James Madison, Tom Jefferson, et al forward to get their opinion of what we've become? I wonder what changes they'd incorporate in their Constitution after seeing us as we are now!:-D I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Roger Wright wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to have a time machine, just to bring James Madison, Tom Jefferson, et al forward to get their opinion of what we've become? I wonder what changes they'd incorporate in their Constitution after seeing us as we are now! They would be far angrier about the Federal government imposing its will through Income Taxes, Roe V Wade and disallowing prayer in School then they would be about any silly Copy Right law. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
The purpose of copyright law and patent law was originally to promote innovation by allowing the inventor/author a time during which (s)he could derive exclusive benefit from the idea or product. At the end of that period of exclusion, the property right was to pass to society so that all might benefit from it. This ruling defeats the purpose of the law, and while it does extend personal property interests ( a good thing, I agree), it does nothing to benefit the general population. Innovation builds upon the works of others. I don't recall who said it, but it has been said that, "If I have seen further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." Shame on me for forgetting the author (it's still copyrighted I guess), but the vision contained within that statement gives clear insight into the process by which this nation became great. To prohibit future visionaries from building upon the innovations of the past, be it in the arts or the sciences, is to cripple the nation and the world. Such interpretations of the law condemn future generations to re-inventing the wheel. I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
I think the founders were first and formost respectors of private property rights. Given the role intellectual property plays in the modern world, I think they would have agreed with the court on this issue. The concept of a company being forced to surrender ownership of their own property so that society can benefit from it is something Marx would have been far more comfortable with than Jefferson. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Yes, but what new ideas would we unite around? The left is inherently Marxist, the Right is overwhelmingly religious zealots of one type or another. The problem is people who get bent out of shape over this Copyright ruling (which does not represent any abuse of the constitution even though it does expose weaknesses in our system ) will turn a blind eye to constitutional travisties such as Roe v. Wade. What do we unite around? "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: The left is inherently Marxist, the Right is overwhelmingly religious zealots of one type or another. I don't find either to be true; people on both sides of the fence tend to gather closer to the middle than to either extreme. Stan Shannon wrote: What do we unite around? Paraphrasing an old western movie: "Whiskey, and fresh women for my men!" I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
-
Roger Wright wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to have a time machine, just to bring James Madison, Tom Jefferson, et al forward to get their opinion of what we've become? I wonder what changes they'd incorporate in their Constitution after seeing us as we are now! They would be far angrier about the Federal government imposing its will through Income Taxes, Roe V Wade and disallowing prayer in School then they would be about any silly Copy Right law. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: They would be far angrier about the Federal government imposing its will through Income Taxes, Roe V Wade and disallowing prayer in School then they would be about any silly Copy Right law. No doubt! And they'd be furious with the blatant usurpation by the Judicial and Executive branches of the powers reserved to the Legislature. I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: The left is inherently Marxist, the Right is overwhelmingly religious zealots of one type or another. I don't find either to be true; people on both sides of the fence tend to gather closer to the middle than to either extreme. Stan Shannon wrote: What do we unite around? Paraphrasing an old western movie: "Whiskey, and fresh women for my men!" I've gone to find myself. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here.
Roger Wright wrote: I don't find either to be true; people on both sides of the fence tend to gather closer to the middle than to either extreme. Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot, I'll eat my hat. Can you imagine either of those two in charge of a new constitutional convention?!!!!! Roger Wright wrote: "Whiskey, and fresh women for my men!" Sounds like my kind of revolution... :) "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Roger Wright wrote: I don't find either to be true; people on both sides of the fence tend to gather closer to the middle than to either extreme. Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot, I'll eat my hat. Can you imagine either of those two in charge of a new constitutional convention?!!!!! Roger Wright wrote: "Whiskey, and fresh women for my men!" Sounds like my kind of revolution... :) "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot, I'll eat my hat. Can you imagine either of those two in charge of a new constitutional convention?!!!!! Stop that! You're frightening me!!!:omg: [checking my ammunition stock now, oiling up the AK...] Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003 -
Roger Wright wrote: I don't find either to be true; people on both sides of the fence tend to gather closer to the middle than to either extreme. Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot, I'll eat my hat. Can you imagine either of those two in charge of a new constitutional convention?!!!!! Roger Wright wrote: "Whiskey, and fresh women for my men!" Sounds like my kind of revolution... :) "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist... If Hillary Clinton is a Marxist I can't imagine what you'd call Tony Benn or Ken Livingstone! :omg: Stan Shannon wrote: ...and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot... He doesn't get any press in the UK. Probably a good thing... Anna :rose: www.annasplace.me.uk
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia GraeschTrouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++
-
I think the founders were first and formost respectors of private property rights. Given the role intellectual property plays in the modern world, I think they would have agreed with the court on this issue. The concept of a company being forced to surrender ownership of their own property so that society can benefit from it is something Marx would have been far more comfortable with than Jefferson. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." - Thomas Jefferson
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." - Thomas Jefferson
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Well, if Hillary Clinton ain't a Marxist and if Jerry Falwell ain't a religious Zealot, I'll eat my hat. Can you imagine either of those two in charge of a new constitutional convention?!!!!! Stop that! You're frightening me!!!:omg: [checking my ammunition stock now, oiling up the AK...] Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003 -
Roger Wright wrote: oiling up the AK A communist weapon! :omg::wtf::-D
Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop
Even worse - an Egyptian version:-) Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003 -
Even worse - an Egyptian version:-) Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003