Slashdot Mirror


Comic Book on Copyright and Creativity

An anonymous reader writes "Three law professors have written a comic book on copyright and creativity -- focusing on the effects of expanding rights and restrictive licensing on documentary film. The book is available for free online via the creative commons license. High points include Larry Lessig as the Statue of Liberty, a version of the Crypt Keeper who looks like Justice Rehnquist, and comic book riffs from the Silver Surfer. At the end, the book discusses the 'cultural environmentalism' movement which has been getting some attention recently."

50 comments

  1. Mirror of PDFs by AliasN · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mirror of PDFs here in case it gets ./-ed (Low bandwidth, but still):
    http://linuxownzwindows.com/mirror/cspd/

    1. Re:Mirror of PDFs by phiwum · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Say, this mirroring raises an interesting question: Is mirroring an article a fair use right?

      Now, clearly you have been granted the right to mirror in this case (by the Creative Commons license on the inside cover of the comic book). But what about in general?

      My guess is that mirroring in general counts as re-distributing without permission. But has anyone seen any argument for or against my guess?

      --
      Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
    2. Re:Mirror of PDFs by AliasN · · Score: 1

      Good Question. I think that people just try to avoid mirroring copyrighted things.. Take a Windows XP SP2 patch. Unless it's a very big company promoting Microsoft products (say CNET), Microsoft would probably ask that the patch would be taken down. The reason in this case would be because they couldn't control who gets it (invalid serials, anyone). On the other hand, most stuff like this that would be so sensitive to copyright probably wouldn't be mirrored by anyone anyways.

    3. Re:Mirror of PDFs by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      My guess is that mirroring in general counts as re-distributing without permission. But has anyone seen any argument for or against my guess?

      That's the argument the news sites which are unhappy about Google searching their content are making.

      You're probably not far off the mark, and certainly other people are making that claim.

      What would be ultimately decided by a court (and in which country) has yet to be determined AFAIK.
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. OT, but hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  3. Hard to read, difficult to follow by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm all for but the format
    the use of of the comic
    various me- was such that
    diums to I just couldn't
    make a point tell which
    about diffi- frame followed
    cult topics. which frame.

    Then you get to the payoff and it's just a screed against copyright law as it stands. It doesn't offer guidance, just copyright-hate.

    1. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by LeonGeeste · · Score: 1

      Yeah, some things
      are really hard to
      follow like the way
      you put line breaks
      in for no reason.

      --
      Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
    2. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
      Then you get to the payoff and it's just a screed against copyright law as it stands. It doesn't offer guidance, just copyright-hate.

      What did you expect? The first thing that came to my mind was "Great, liberal propaganda that my tax dollars paid for and my kids will be bringing home to put in the girbal cage".

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      Liberal propaganda?

    4. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      It's sad that people need to use propeganda for the truth.

    5. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass. OP was using 2 columns!

    6. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by gilroy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I might have missed something, but how is this a use of your tax dollars (good or bad)? It claims to have been funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

    7. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      >The first thing that came to my mind was "Great, liberal propaganda that my tax dollars paid for ..."

      From the linked website: "This comic book was made possible by a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. ".

      Anyway, what's "liberal" about wanting to move copyright law closer to what it was in the Nixon administration?

    8. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Anyway, what's "liberal" about wanting to move copyright law closer to what it was in the Nixon administration? Nixon went to China!! He created the EPA and OSHA! He supported affirmative action! He was a freakin' pinko!!

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    9. Re:Hard to read, difficult to follow by gilroy · · Score: 1
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Then you get to the payoff and it's just a screed against copyright law as it stands. It doesn't offer guidance, just copyright-hate.


      Hmmm... from the comic:

      Of course, filmmakers and distributors should get paid for their work and copyright should prevent wholesale appropriation ... But documentarians need to depict a world full of copyrighted culture. Demanding payment for every use can hinder the very creativity that copyright is supposed to encourage.

      Ah, yes, I see it now, all the drooling venom from these godless commies... Get real. Despite what is peddled these days, not all criticism is a mad attack. The comic is in fact quite clear that copyright serves a social good and that the system is not intrinsically flawed.

      Take your own jeremiad somewhere else.

      Oh, and postnote based on the postscript:

      So count us as stodgy believers in the copyright system, not revolutionaries eager to scrap the whole thing. ... [But] the system seems to have gone astray.

  4. I hope by Eightyford · · Score: 0, Troll

    I hope the comic isn't copyrighted.

    1. Re:I hope by mattjb0010 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You could have RTFC. It's distributed under the creative commons license.

    2. Re:I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was a joke...

  5. Hate and guidance by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It doesn't offer guidance, just copyright-hate.

    Well-written copyright-hate is guidance ... to lawmakers.

    1. Re:Hate and guidance by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That's a horrendously biased view of it all. Did you stop half-way through or something?

      The whole thing wasn't anti-copyright at all. Although it does complain rather loudly about how current copyright practices negatively impact ARTISTS.

      The whole thing is written from the artists point of view, so I can't see how you can possibly call it copyright-hating.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  6. Good way to highlight the issues at hand by the_humeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unfortunately, most people are generally too apathetic to care about such things as "fair use." It's really a shame. If you film something incidentally for a documentary, why must you clear the rights? How about the buildings that said documentary takes place?

    1. Re:Good way to highlight the issues at hand by Bob+MacSlack · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's so much that people don't care, it just hasn't really hit home yet. Regardless of whether copying your "copy protected" cd to your computer is legal or not, people do it because it's reasonable to 99.9% of the populace. When common sense things like that get taken away, people will wake up and start demanding action.

    2. Re:Good way to highlight the issues at hand by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that the aesthetic qualities of design are automatically copyrighted as well. Not only should you theoretically clear the architect for the building, you need to clear all of the companies whose products appear in your film, assuming they aren't strictly functional. Not only are there copyrights to the music the guitarist is playing (about a dozen rights holders, actually), but the guitar itself has an aesthetic copyright from Fender.

      Thankfully, nobody really pursues the aesthetic copyrights on daily objects... or NOTHING would ever get filmed... but we're getting there. Caterpillar may not have much of a case for one, but if a Mini Cooper appeared in your film and they didn't want it to, they'd have a pretty strong case for a copyright.

    3. Re:Good way to highlight the issues at hand by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Most people simply dont realize that restaurants don't sing you happy birthday anymore because of copyright entanglements. For most people things aren't bad enough yet for the problem to be percieved.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  7. is there a "the creative commons license"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Isn't the creative commons license actually a list of licenses?
    http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/meet-the -licenses

  8. Indeed. by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

    Yes, "liberal propaganda". There is even a quiche recipe in the back. A quiche recipe! My children will never drink chardonnay!

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Indeed. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh my god. Unlike you, I am all for indoctrinating our nation's children in the ways and methodologies of godless communism. But quiche? They go too far.

  9. Wow by jibjibjib · · Score: 1

    Wow, that's a great comic. It does a very good job of explaining some issues related to copyright.
    There's also a wikipedia article on "cultural environmentalism". It doesn't have much in it though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_environmenta lism

  10. Easy to read, simple to follow by Marce1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Doing as a comic is a really straightforward way of introducing fair-use copyright material including images, songs etc.. and references to them as both critique and parady - it really covers the publication against trivial law suits.

    Furthermore, it adds nicely to the overwhelming feeling of the copright mire, while actually spreading the information around the page nicely (like a mindmap).

    Its so good its got me thinking of doing a documentary here in the UK.

    If I use lots of 'fair use' material, I can send the product (prior to public release) with notices like 'if you dont complain / sue I will release this as fair use after 40 days' literally begging the major corporate owners to sue: If I win or they don't complain I would use the data protection act to prove they had received the works and the warning notices, and include the whole documentary under some form of GPL - as such I would be the only point of contact needed to go through trials of fair use on that material, and anyone could use the original footage, or my new creation, simply by referencing it (or me)..

    Do that to enough material, or highlight it to enough of the public, and we could change the culture back from oppressive rights to expressive rights. Right on!

    --
    [ insert meme here ]
    1. Re:Easy to read, simple to follow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's because you're from the UK or something, but that was the dumbest fucking comment I've ever read here on Slashdot. You never actually come to a point. Your spelling, grammar, and punctuation are atrocious. Your overuse of jargon where it is completely unnecessary is annoying and distracting.

      I have a hard time believing that you aren't a bot.

    2. Re:Easy to read, simple to follow by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of a song sharing network I thought of.

      It would all be reviews with a clip of less than 3 seconds. The reviews could be searched, and downloaded, and you could on your side arrange all the reviews in order and reconstruct the entire song. Of course it would be real hard to prove the distributed song review network was not intended for piracy (to a proponderance of evidence anyway).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Easy to read, simple to follow by Marce1 · · Score: 1

      That's very much along the same lines to what I was trying to get at (badly, apparently).

      I was just hoping to use the bank of materials 'approved as being used fairly' as a yardstick. The idea is that, should an artist worry about copyright, they could use material I had already used; EMI, Sony and others would have a much harder time demanding clearance fees and claiming copyright on material already deemed as 'fair use', albeit only in the UK. I would have already refused to pay any royalties or clearance fees, and the copyright owners would have had a reasonable time to do something about it, should they want to.

      I was thinking it might work a bit like the 'prior art' clause in patents: Prior 'fair use' of snippets of copyrighted material.

      Even if somone were to be asked to pay a clearance fee on something, say 3 seconds of Marilyn Monroe's rendition of "Happy Birthday (Mr President)", they would feel much more comfortable opposing it in court if there was a different 3 seconds used in another work (in the resource bank) they could cite as having had no fees involved..

      --
      [ insert meme here ]
  11. Re: troll by Marce1 · · Score: 1

    You clearly don't read much. Call it flowery prose if you want, but dumb was a poor choice of words: I am not silent.

    You will notice the point at the end of each sentence, and the point of the post in the final sentence.
    Quote one incorrect spelling.
    Quote any use of jargon (with a suitable replacement).

    Please - I don't mind being corrected, even harshly, but it get right.

    --
    [ insert meme here ]
  12. I hadn't heard that joke before by sobeks_eye · · Score: 1
    Three law professors have written a comic book...
    Is that like "Kurt Gödel, the Pope, and Jimi Hendrix walk into a bar..."?
    1. Re:I hadn't heard that joke before by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Is that like "Kurt Gödel, the Pope, and Jimi Hendrix walk into a bar..."?

      That joke sounds rather Incomplete to me...

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:I hadn't heard that joke before by Grotus · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see you prove that!

      --
      "From my cold, dead hands you damn, dirty apes!" - CH
  13. Re: troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doing as a comic is a really straightforward way of introducing fair-use copyright material including images, songs etc.. and references to them as both critique and parady- it really covers the publication against trivial law suits.

    Here in your first paragraph, you've already made several mistakes which I've highlighted in bold.

    Doing as a comic
    This is ungrammatical.

    etc.. and references
    First, if you wish to use ellipses, then use 3 periods. Ideally, you'd use the HTML code, but I don't know it offhand and wouldn't expect anyone else to. Second, you are either forgetting to capitalize the beginning of the next sentence, or you are writing a run-on sentence. I tend towards the latter because your grasp of English is apparently feeble.

    and references to them as both critique and parady
    I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly you are trying to say. This isn't even close to a correct grammatical construction of a sentence.

    parady
    "Parody" is misspelled.

    it really covers the publication against trivial law suits.
    Again, you've extended your run-on sentence with another non-sequitor. "It"? The comic? The comic really covers the publication against trivial law suits? I don't think you've understood the comic at all. The comic highlights the difficulties inherent in our convoluted system of copyright. It doesn't "cover the publication against ... law suits (sic)."

    law suits
    "Lawsuit" is one word.

    Furthermore, it adds nicely to the overwhelming feeling of the copright mire, while actually spreading the information around the page nicely (like a mindmap).

    Furthermore
    "Furthermore", on top of what the comic doesn't do (I suppose)...

    it adds nicely to the overwhelming feeling of the copright mire
    The copyright mire feels overwhelmed? Maybe it should join a support group.

    copright
    "Copyright" is spelled correctly elsewhere in your post, so I assume you just have typing difficulties sometimes.

    while actually spreading the information around the page nicely
    This is not a complete thought. If I read you correctly (from the start of this travesty of a sentence), the comic causes the copyright mire to feel overwhelmed while also spreading information around the page. No matter how I try to parse that, it doesn't make sense.

    mindmap
    Uh, right. Would you mind to tell us readers what you mean by the word "mindmap"? If you picked up this jargon from some book, please name the book.

    Its so good its got me thinking of doing a documentary here in the UK.

    Its...its
    Clearly you mean "It's". "It's" = "It is". "Its" is possessive.

    Aside from your misuse of 'its', you actually do seem to have some sort of a clear point here. You are impreseed by the comic and think that you would also like to do a documentary. I suppose I could nitpick here and say you should have used "make" or "film" instead of "do", but this is close enough to standard English usage that you get a pass.

    If I use lots of 'fair use' material, I can send the product (prior to public release) with notices like 'if you dont complain / sue I will release this as fair use after 40 days' literally begging the major corporate owners to sue: If I win or they don't complain I would use the data protection act to prove they had received the works and the warning notices, and include the whole documentary under some form of GPL - as such I would be the only point of contact needed to go through trials of fair use on that material, and anyone could use the original footage, or my new creation, simply by referencing it (or me)..

    Before further commenting on this paragraph, I'd like to point you in the direction of the period key. It's on the right side of your keyboard between the c

  14. And another thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My previous post analyzed your original post.

    I would like to respond to this one as well.

    You clearly don't read much.
    In fact, I read quite a bit. Judging from your ability to write the English language, I would just as soon assume that English wasn't your first language.

    Call it flowery prose if you want,
    I would not call your original post any such thing. I would call it "crap", "worthless", "pointless", and "stupid". I wouldn't call it "flowery".

    dumb was a poor choice of words: I am not silent.
    So "dumb" was a poor description of your post because you aren't silent? Care to let me in on why your being unsilent means that what you say isn't dumb?

    There is a saying that I learned when I was a little boy. It is far better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    I hope you get my drift.

    You will notice the point at the end of each sentence
    No, I did not notice "the point" at the end of each of your sentences. Not unless you meant the period. Please refer to my other post for further criticisms of your original post.

    and the point of the post in the final sentence
    Ah, yes. The point about changing our culture from an "oppressive rights" culture to an "expressive rights" culture. I'm afraid that you have substituted a soundbite for a thesis.

    Quote one incorrect spelling.
    I quoted several.

    Quote any use of jargon (with a suitable replacement).
    I quoted your use of jargon. Your use of jargon was completely unnecessary and did nothing to help elucidate your point. Jargon should be used to make something clearer. "Mindmap" doesn't mean anything to anybody except yourself. Assuming that your point about the comic spreading information nicely around the page made any sense in the first place, it is completely unnecessary to restate that using an obscure non-word like "mindmap".

    Please - I don't mind being corrected, even harshly, but it get right.
    I'm writing these two posts as a favor to you. Apparently English isn't your first language, and I admire anyone who goes out of their way to learn multiple languages. However, the problem isn't just your horrendous misuse of the language, but also your inability to form coherent thoughts and transmit them to others. Maybe you suffer from a mental handicap like autism as well.

    So which is it? Should I pity you for your mental handicap or should I mock you for your low intelligence?

    1. Re:And another thing! by Marce1 · · Score: 1

      I'm writing these two posts as a favor to you.
      No you're not - you are being a troll, and pretending to justify it.

      Evidence from "Re: troll":

      1) 1 insult: Flamebait. Score 0
      your grasp of English is apparently feeble
      See my reply to "Re: troll", an apt title.

      2) Failure by own standards: Funny. Score +1
      I assume you just have typing difficulties sometimes.
      I refer you to "impreseed".

      Evidence from "And another thing!"

      3) Sniping flamebait. Score -2
      I would just as soon assume that English wasn't your first language.
      As soon as what? And for what reason - for the hell of it?

      4) 1 opinion, 3 insults: clear flamebait. Score -3
      I would call [your first post] "crap", "worthless", "pointless", and "stupid"
      Now you are just ranting.

      5) Failure by own standards: Funny. Score +1
      "Mindmap" doesn't mean anything to anybody except yourself. Assuming that your point about the comic spreading information nicely around the page made any sense in the first place, it is completely unnecessary to restate that using an obscure non-word like "mindmap".
      You have re-stated yourself.

      6) Failure by own standards: Funny. Score +2
      It is far better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

      I hope you get my drift.

      My doubts are gone!

      7) Double standards: Off-topic. Score -1
      I did not notice "the point" at the end of each of your sentences. Not unless you meant the period.
      No, I meant the point, not the point symbol. Period means 'space' to me: I had not picked you up on using Americanisms, don't be so petty.

      8) Failure by own standards: Funny. Score +1
      Maybe you suffer from a mental handicap like autism as well.
      Are you asking a question or making a statement? Did you mean to say "It may be that..." or "Maybe ... as well?"

      Total score -1: You are a troll.

      Perhaps you did not notice you were being a troll. Maybe you suffer from a mental handicap like Multiple Personality Disorder?
      If you do want to tell me, I will be happy to read both rants and constructive criticism, but not in the same posts. They are mutually exclusive: So which is it? Should I pity you for your mental handicap, mock you for your low intelligence or discuss with you?

      --
      [ insert meme here ]
  15. Modulo Nixon by tepples · · Score: 1

    Nixon [...] was a freakin' pinko!!

    Replace Nixon with any other U.S. President before 1976 and the statement remains true.

    1. Re:Modulo Nixon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Nixon [...] was a freakin' pinko!!"

      Replace Nixon with any other U.S. President before 1976 and the statement remains true.

      Why only "before 1976"? By these standards, I think we can pretty easily count Carter (full relations with China, disarmament, created the DoE, opposed anti-gay legislation) as a pinko too. 1980 was when U.S. politics took a hard turn to the radical right.

    2. Re:Modulo Nixon by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      Wait, isn't this the generation that was doing drugs in the '60s? That would explain a lot...

  16. It could improve a while... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    We should read some (ack!) Jack T. Chick tracts and see how they simplify stuff to present their point of view. I know, their stories suck and are full of lies - but at least they do good in marketing.

    Having said this, I think the comic should have a more comedic approach, like having Shakespeare being interrupted by some lawyers because his works are patented or something. (Oh, wait, this is about copyright, not patents. Well, the comic should talk about the distinction of both because of this "intellectual property" fuzz).

    My 2 (c).

  17. Rehnquist by volpe · · Score: 2, Funny

    a version of the Crypt Keeper who looks like Justice Rehnquist,

    I imagine that Rehnquist looks a bit like the Crypt Keeper too right about now.

  18. Demerits by Augie+De+Blieck+Jr. · · Score: 1

    It's not a bad presentation (aside from the art and lettering), but it almost lost me by using COMIC SANS for a font on the "inside front cover."

    UGH

    I would direct their attention to

    http://www.blambot.com/

    or

    http://www.comicraft.com/

    for better choices.

    -Augie

  19. re-Re: troll by Marce1 · · Score: 1

    Some valid, concrete points - good for you.

    Doing as a comic is clearly wrong. I omitted the second word, 'it'. Nor did I catch it when proof-reading - a valid point.

    I like run-on sentences... but I prefer .. 2 dots. It looks better. It is very bad grammar and now I remember why I do it. I hope it becomes a new fad. I also think "etc.. and" looks better than "etc.... and" or "etc. ... and". You have a valid point, but I prefer 2 dots..

    As a run-on sentence they are the images, songs etc.. referenced to as both critique & parody in the expression "etc.. and references them"..
    I would like to point out that ellipses and the dot-dot-dot used usually at the end of sentences do not infer the same thing... I like using dot-dot-dot (or now, "..") to infer pause for thought. From the context it clearly does not infer omissions in a quotation.

    "Parody" is misspelled.
    Spelt badly, actually. However, I recognise that many Americanisms tend to drop the hyphen, so I wont argue the spelling of "misspelled". I would ask, though, is there such a word as "misspelt"? Are "mis-spelled" or even "mis-spelt" considered acceptable?

    Its...its
    Clearly you mean "It's"

    Half a valid point. I meant "It's so good it has got me thinking..". It would be wrong to say "It's so good it is got me thinking"..

    You are impreseed by the comic
    I am not! I am impressed by it..

    It"? The comic?
    Again, you have half a valid point. "It" was the comic form which covers the publication against trivial trials, but since I actually said "Doing as a comic" instead of "doing it as a comic" at the start, I will agree there some ambiguity. That said, even you noticed that "the comic covers the publication" may be a true phrase, but is pointless. I am not sure why you chose that interpretation.

    It doesn't "cover the publication against ... law suits (sic)."
    The authors have made quite clear throughout the comic that are both highlighting a problem, (convoluted copyright laws), and using copyright materials under the terms of 'fair use' to do so.
    By not mentioning the latter point, I don't think you've understood the comic at all..

    "Lawsuit" is one word.
    Lawsuit is an Americanism, but is quicker than "legal proceedings". I remain unsure as to whether a UK dictionary would accept one word or two, but since you know I am from the UK you are just nit-picking. There may still be a case in the US for using seperate words, since "sue" still pertains to "suit", and "lawsue" is not a verb.

    "Furthermore", on top of what the comic doesn't do (I suppose)
    No - further to what the comic does do: critique and parody.

    The copyright mire feels overwhelmed?
    You might think that: It is a valid post-modern point.
    I wrote that the copyright mire feels overwhelming - hence there being an "overwhelming feeling of the copyright mire". English is a funny language.

    close enough to standard English usage that you get a pass.
    Which mountain? Or did you mean I am passed by? Or, maybe I get a passing grade? I am nit-picking here because I meant "doing a documentary", which would involve different media, and may end up as printed word, images, movies (distributed as DVD, IPTV, or perhaps on VHS film) or even audio media. Both "making" and "doing" are equally applicable when talking of modern multi-media, regardless of standard English usage. In hindsight, "making" sounds better. So does "a passing grade".

    mindmap
    It is modern jargon, but there is no better way of putting it. If you don't know what a mindmap is, speculate, research it, or ignore it. The jargon adds meaning to my sentence about the layout of the comic.

    "Fair use" describes a manner of usage permitted by copyright law. It is not an adjective to describe different types of material.
    Yet. Building a bank of material already used fa

    --
    [ insert meme here ]
  20. Copyright Act of 1976 by tepples · · Score: 1

    Why only "before 1976"?

    In 1976, the Copyright Act of 1976 extended the average copyright term for newly published works from 29 years (28+28 with comparatively few authors taking advantage of the renewal term) to 75 years.

    1980 was when U.S. politics took a hard turn to the radical right.

    Then why did President Clinton, a member of the more traditionally leftist party, sign the NET Act, DMCA, and Bono Act, letting bipartisan voice votes stand in both houses, instead of forcing representatives and senators who supported the bills to reveal their identities in a roll-call to override his veto?