RE: [dvd-discuss] Copyright term only increased twice

["Glendon M. Gross" <gross(at)xinetd.ath.cx>]

I suppose the Qu'ran would be a derivative work also, by the same logic.
Maybe
we could recover the cost of the Trade Center by charging Muslim nations
back royalties on the text.  By now the royalty payments owed must be
in the billions or trillions of dollars, depending on the interest rate.

(Sorry,  couldn't resist.  It seems like a natural conclusion.  :)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of Kurt
Hockenbury
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 11:03 AM
To: DVD-Discuss
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Copyright term only increased twice


On 8 Aug 2002, D. C. Sessions wrote:

> In all seriousness, I propose that we back legislation that
> takes their "some copyright good, more better" argument to
> its logical conclusion: a retroactive extension to 1789.

Why stop there?

"Lawyers today filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Jewish people
everywhere, vs. Christianity.  They claim that the Christians are infringing
on their Intellectual Property, known in Christian circles as "The Old
Testatment".  They also seek to prove that the so-called "New Testament" is
a
derivative work, based upon characters created in the Old Testament, and
thus the exclusive property of the Children of Ahbraham."