RE: [dvd-discuss] 50 year copyright logo suggestion

[John Galt <galt(at)inconnu.isu.edu>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Richard Hartman wrote:

>So ... how do you copyright a copyright notice format? ;-)

ask gnu.org....

>
>--
>-Richard M. Hartman
>hartman@onetouch.com
>
>186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 12:33 PM
>> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> Subject: [dvd-discuss] 50 year copyright logo suggestion
>>
>>
>> A visual pun on (C) == 0 yields:
>>
>> Copyright 5(c)
>>
>> see
>>
>> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/twiki/bin/view/Openlaw/CopyrightReformLogo
>>
>> for it correctly formatted.
>>
>>
>>
>> microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
>> >
>> > On 19 Jan 2003 at 21:46, Sham Gardner wrote:
>> >
>> > Date sent:              Sun, 19 Jan 2003 21:46:42 +0100
>> > From:                   Sham Gardner <mail@risctaker.inka.de>
>> > To:                     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> > Subject:                Re: [dvd-discuss] various reactions
>> to supreme court travesty
>> > Send reply to:          dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>> >
>> > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 12:32:40PM -0800,
>> microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
>> > > > I just finished reading the SCOTUS decision...what
>> rambling tortured
>> > > > argumentation....with an occasional sneer at the
>> dissents. After obfuscating
>> > > > enough, they simply conclude "the petitioner is wrong"
>> > > >
>> > > > I don't think the proposal in
>> > > > http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/blog/archives/EAFAQ.html
>> > > > will pass muster. While politically compromising...the
>> approach of allowing
>> > > > profitable works to keep paying the tax ad infinitum
>> WOULD be constitutionally
>> > > > invalid under the SCOTUS decision.  THe decision
>> pointed out that "well even
>> > > > though the terms are getting longer, they still are
>> limited" Such an approach
>> > > > would permit unlimited terms and so would not pass even
>> under this ruling.
>> > >
>> > > The proposal doesn't actually say it would allow
>> copyrights to extend
>> > > indefinitely if the payments were made. It's not really
>> clear on the matter at
>> > > all. I understood it to mean that maximum terms would be
>> left as they are, but n
>> > > years into that term copyright protection ceases to be automatic.
>> >
>> > You are right but without an explicit limit that cannot be
>> changed the proposal
>> > is without merit. So that needs come clarification. As .002
>> has pointed out ,
>> > there must be some residual benefit to the copyright. In
>> the case of Sherlock
>> > Holmes, Nicolaus Meyer wrote two pastiches, the first was
>> wonderful and made
>> > into a enjoyable film. The BBC pastiches have been less
>> wonderful but at least
>> > were entertaining.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > But aside from that. Didn't it say 30 years rather than
>> 50 a few days ago?
>> > > I realise placing the threshold further back probably
>> makes the proposal
>> > > more palatable to the other side, but I wouldn't have
>> thought it would take 50
>> > > years.
>> >
>> > The website has 50 now...of course nothing less than in
>> perpetuity gratis is
>> > not acceptable to JackBoots and company...
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/DeCSS/
>> > >
>> > > "No dictator, no invader, can hold an imprisoned
>> population by force of
>> > > arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe
>> than the need for
>> > > freedom. Against that power, governments and tyrants and
>> armies cannot
>> > > stand." (Ambassador G'Kar, Babylon 5)
>>
>>
>

Pardon me, but you have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a
damn.
email galt@inconnu.isu.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQE+NwUR+ZSKG3nWr3ARApw+AJ9V01A14zSEnX1KIPejBXEZfy+4aQCfZHQ+
S1I+qITO4XuKrm8gI28oIAM=
=PGRO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----