RE: [dvd-discuss] Specific ironies of the CTEA

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

Well if they are not legally dead when immersed in the liquid helium, they will be then. Why? You defrost them and they decompose. If they are not dead then it is suicide or murder also.

"information-theoretic death depends on presently unknown details of  how the brain works." has no meaning. What that says is X is defined by something unknown...

"Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe@usg.com> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 12/10/2002 12:26 PM Please respond to dvd-discuss

To:        "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>         cc:                 Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Specific ironies of the CTEA

From the cryonics faq at:
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/tsf/Public-Mail/cryonics/html/00
18.9.html

there are 3 different definitions of "dead" that they use.

clinical death - A person is clinically dead if they are in cardiac 
                 arrest and their pupils do not contract when light is shined 
                 into them. 

information-theoretic death - A person has reached information-theoretic 
                 death if a healthy state of that person could not possibly be 
                 deduced from the current state. The exact timing of 
                 information-theoretic death depends on presently unknown details of 
                 how the brain works. The current best estimates put it several hours

                 after clinical death.

legal death - A person is legally dead if a doctor has signed a death 
                 certificate with his or her name on it. This tends to happen when 
                 the doctor believes that modern technology will not be able to 
                 restore them to health. The criteria for legal death change with
time. 

If no physician signs a death certificate, the the person wouldn't be
legally
dead, right? Maybe clinically, but that isn't what matters to copyright law.

I think this makes a great counter to "life+" on the term. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 12:24 PM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Cc: 'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'; owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Specific ironies of the CTEA



Well medically they are dead, they are just not decomposing as with the
other dead. I don't know anyone who has survived a bath in liquid
helium...or do they use liquid nitrogen? 


"Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe@usg.com> 
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu 
12/10/2002 09:37 AM 
Please respond to dvd-discuss 
        
        To:        "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'"
<dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu> 
        cc:         
        Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Specific ironies of the CTEA




-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:16 PM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Specific ironies of the CTEA


> Hey...here's another funny thing that could happen...suppose an 
> author disappears and is declared dead after 7(?) years. His estate 
> sells of all his belongings, gives them away or whatever and distributes
> his assets to heirs. Then the author shows up (Not implausible. Bierced
> disappeared. Traven of Treasure of the Sierre Madre reclused to Mexico).
> Who owns the copyright? Copyright is a FEDERAL right. Being declared
> dead is a state or local one. 

What about cryogenics? An author is frozen and NEVER declared dead.