European Parliament Blocks Copyright Reform With 113% Voter Turnout

New submitter mcmadman writes "In a bizarre turn of events, the legal affairs committee of the European Parliament, voted to weaken a reform of the copyright monopoly for allowing re-publication and access to orphan works. What is surprising is that the voter turnout happened to be 113%. That there were three votes too many, and that these three votes determined the outcome, was pointed out to the committee. Unfortunately, when this was done, along with formally requesting a re-vote, the re-vote was denied."

Comments

Whoops

[niftydude]

I guess someone accidentally bought too many votes this time.

Re:Whoops

[RubberChainsaw]

The reason is that Diebold was responsible for the count.

Re:Whoops

[Darinbob]

Naw, just sometimes you get extra in the package if you buy in bulk.

Re:Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why more and more people are deciding to ignore copyright and just download what they want. The copyright holders are pumping more and more money to the lawmakers to extend their rights.

I don't really care about an authors copyright 40 years after they have died. Unfortunately everyone else still thinks they should have the right to make money off of their works from now until the end of time.

Re:Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

Hold on, a recount is showing 213% now.

Re:Whoops

[cpu6502]

This is standard practice in the EU. When Ireland held a referendum and rejected the Lisbon Treaty, the EU technocrats didn't like the results so they just held ANOTHER referendum six months later. And in France & Denmark (or was it Netherlands) they too rejected the Treaty, and yet somehow it passed. I still haven't worked that out. Must be EU magic.

As independence party leader Nigel Firage says, "We just keep holding elections until we get the answer desired..... And remove Greek or Italian PMs we don't like. This is not what democracy is supposed to look like!"

"It matters not who gets the most votes. It matters who Counts the votes to select the desired winner." - Stalin. I think we witnessed that crap in the US with Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and a few other recent caucus contests (where Romney won since he's the guy the GOP elite want).

Re:Whoops

[abe ferlman]

You guys have it all wrong. On matters relating to the music and video industries, duplicate votes are worth exactly as many as the originals.

Re:Whoops

[AmiMoJo]

This is standard practice in the EU. When Ireland held a referendum and rejected the Lisbon Treaty, the EU technocrats didn't like the results so they just held ANOTHER referendum six months later.

Er, no. They did what any sensible person would do when their proposal was rejected: listen to the objections and fix it. They changed the stuff the Irish didn't like and then the Irish approved the changes. What's wrong with that? You expect them to give up totally at the first rejection over any aspect what-so-ever?

Re:Whoops

[jamstar7]

Sounds like they've revived an old Chicago tradition - vote early, vote often.

Re:Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we witnessed that crap in the US with Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and a few other recent caucus contests (where Romney won since he's the guy the GOP elite want).

Um, no. I think you meant to say 'he's the guy the *media* elite want'. The GOP faithful have been rallying around Santorum, as they say Romney's not 'conservative' enough.

Re:Whoops

[AlamedaStone]

I think we witnessed that crap in the US with Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and a few other recent caucus contests (where Romney won since he's the guy the GOP elite want).

Um, no. I think you meant to say 'he's the guy the *media* elite want'. The GOP faithful have been rallying around Santorum, as they say Romney's not 'conservative' enough.

The "GOP faithful" are not in the same set as the "GOP elite". The GOP elite aren't crazy about Romney, but they REALLY don't like Santorum because he's a true radical and can't be controlled.

Re:Whoops

[marnues]

Unfortunately that is how American policy usually works. It has become very normative. I think most Americans would agree that after putting heart and soul into something and then not achieving, give up.

Re:Whoops

[marnues]

Radical is such a strong word. And if elected he'll be completely at the mercy of the GOP establishment, especially if they win the Senate. Weakest of the 3 contenders by quite a margin. His electability seems to be based on not taking stands on any policy issue and plugging Christian Right values as often as possible.

Re:Whoops

[Genda]

So you don't think keeping women bare-foot and pregnant, and destroying public education because it causes people to give up magical thinking isn't radical? To paraphrase Bill Maher, the Mullahs of the middle east want to take the world back to the 13th century, but Rick Sanitarium wants to party like it 999. He doesn't just pander to the Religious Right... he goes them one better (a big one.) How long do think it would be, before everyone and their third cousin lynched Rick, if he got his way and nobody (including married folk) should or could have sex except for procreation. The guy is in that rarefied region of the WackoSphere where even the deranged fear to go.

If elected President, you don't think this guy would go full on Rambo against the LesBiGay community, or anyone that disagreed with the Poope? Don't get me wrong, I actually have some sentiment for the Catholic Church (my Dad gave up Catholicism one year for lent.) My Ganny was staunch Irish Catholic right to the grave, and though I didn't always agree with her opinions, she was a pretty awesome lady, and I respected both her point of view and her integrity to her beliefs. I don't doubt that Rick means well. I do doubt that he's sporting a full deck. We've done criminally stupid in the White House, lets avoid fsck nuts.

Re:Whoops

[The Snowman]

How long do think it would be, before everyone and their third cousin lynched Rick, if he got his way and nobody (including married folk) should or could have sex except for procreation. The guy is in that rarefied region of the WackoSphere where even the deranged fear to go.

Being Catholic myself, I had to look into this. According to Wikipedia (lol) he is Catholic, and does have some pretty wacked out views on morality. A small number of them even agree with Catholic doctrine. Yeah, this guy is a nutcase, but he's a fringe lunatic and representative of the rest of us religious folk who exercise our first amendment rights sanely. For example: he opposes stem cell research, while I have to agree with the Pope on this one: stem cells for curing disease = good. Creating Frankenstein's monster = bad. Donating cord blood = good. Killing fetuses for stem cells = bad.

Believing in God is not orthagonal to believing in science. There are millions of people like me who are religious but also exercise rational thought. Then there are the vocal minority of assholes like Santorum who want to legislate the rest of us into the dark ages.

Re:Whoops

[manu0601]

The Lisbon Treaty is just a variant of the rejected european constitution, according the the people that wrote it. The european constitution was rejected by referendum in France and Netherland. There were a lot of reasons to reject it, for instance the fact that the treaty hardcodes economical policy beyond what elections can change. Was that addressed in Libson Treaty? No it was not, and things are getting even more ugly with the latest treaties. At some time we will have to destroy UE and restart something sane.

Re:Whoops

[m1xram]

Bill Maher? He hates women last time I checked. He's called them ever name in the book.

I understand your hatred of the Christian right, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were just horrible weren't they?

Re:Whoops

[rbowen]

That's not true. In politics, if something fails, we sneak it into another bill a few months later.

Re:Whoops

[FictionPimp]

I think people give the president far more credit than he deserves. I'm more worried about who's in the senate, congress, and the supreme court. They pass the laws and decide what holds water. The president is just a mouthpiece.

In other news

[Anonymous Coward]

Putin's approval rating has plummeted to 112% in favor.

So the dead vote in Europe too?

[DesScorp]

113 percent? Where did they count the votes? Chicago?

Re:So the dead vote in Europe too?

[hairyfeet]

That cities slogan should be "Chicago: Where even the dead vote".

As for TFA whether this is true or not frankly doesn't matter, what DOES matter is until the people actually get a voice and a say at the negotiating table then ALL copyrights and patterns should be ignored as the unjust laws that they are. When laws are created by bribery and backroom dealing that goes completely against the will of the people call it what it is, tyranny. Its the locking up of our entire culture behind paywalls for decades after that artist who originally created it has long past, see Elvis, Hendrix, Disney, etc. Not to mention the artists themselves are getting fucked as bad as the people, see Meatloaf having to file for bankruptcy in the 80s because thanks to Hollywood Accounting Bat Out Of Hell I, an album that set records for length of time in the top 200 and may still be there, well that just didn't make a penny don't ya see, or for a more recent Cheap Trick who hasn't seen a single penny from digital sales and whose record company has basically said "Since it didn't exist then so it isn't in the contract you get zip".

So until we the people can get a spot at the negotiating table these laws should be ignored and once more as geeks we should teach the masses how to ignore these laws based on blatant bribery. When both the politicians and courts refuse to listen and continue to support unjust laws then all one can do is ignore these unjust laws just as they ignore the people.

Re:So the dead vote in Europe too?

[drainbramage]

If it's okay for non citizens to vote it must be okay for former citizens to vote?
Just because some one is dead, brain dead, or fictional they must not be denied any 'rights' in the U.S.A.
The right to vote where ever they choose, the right to free housing, the right to free food, the right to defecate on the sidewalk.
Today teh U.S.A. tomorrow teh world!

Re:So the dead vote in Europe too?

[mcgrew]

We in Illinois are so patriotic that even being dead doesn't keep us from voting!

Re:So the dead vote in Europe too?

[Malties]

The best line I have seen in a while: the phenomenon “a temporary form of democratic surplus"

Re:So the dead vote in Europe too?

[kav2k]

I guess they outsourced it to Churov & Co

Math

[philip.paradis]

Hold on fellas, you've got it all wrong. Math is different in Europe (they've got their commas and periods all backward in many places), especially when it's attorneys doing the counting. Folks just have to understand this, and fortunately there's a great instructional video available for those in need of further tutelage.

Re:Math

[Don_dumb]

Hold on fellas, you've got it all wrong. Math is different in Europe (they've got their commas and periods all backward in many places), especially when it's attorneys doing the counting. Folks just have to understand this, and fortunately there's a great instructional video available for those in need of further tutelage.

Very true. For a start - we call it Maths

Re:Math

[wvmarle]

Hold on fellas, you've got it all wrong. Math is different in Europe (they've got their commas and periods all backward in many places), especially when it's attorneys doing the counting. Folks just have to understand this, and fortunately there's a great instructional video available for those in need of further tutelage.

Very true. For a start - we call it Maths

So that's where the vote count went wrong! They were counting plurals where there should be singulars!

Re:Math

[Eraesr]

Yeah, it's us Europeans that got it backward. really?

Re:Math

[91degrees]

Plus , we use metric. 1 Metric vote = 1.13 US votes.

Re:Math

[GmExtremacy]

Arrrr... To be...

Re:Math

[Sneeka2]

But that's going to be the other way around soon, what with the Euro going down and the US$1 per bought-European-vote rate increasing.

Re:Math

[TapeCutter]

Hold on fellas, you've got it all wrong. Math is different in Europe (they've got their commas and periods all backward in many places), especially when it's attorneys doing the counting. Folks just have to understand this, and fortunately there's a great instructional video available for those in need of further tutelage.

Very true. For a start - we call it Maths

So that's where the vote count went wrong! They were counting plurals where there should be singulars!

No, that's the 'S' bend. They're going to need a plumber because someone has clogged it up with due process, and people are starting to notice the stench.

Re:Math

[JWSmythe]

    What the heck? I was expecting a Rick Roll, and you gave a link to a real explanation.

    $8 billion or 75,000 jobs? Damn. :)

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

Show me.

Re:Math

[chrismcb]

I never understood why so many people care about the thermometer in relation to when water changes state. Sure a scientist cares, but the average lay person?

Re:Math

[Hentes]

Because if the temparature is above that, it rains. If below, it snows.

Re:Math

[oneandoneis2]

Seriously?

Here's a simple one: It's winter. You have to drive somewhere. Is there likely to be ice on the roads you need to look out for? You check the thermometer.

It's near zero centigrade = there's likely to be ice. Simple & intuitive. Whereas with fahrenheit, you actually need to remember the number which represents water freezing. More work for no gain.

Re:Math

[The Master Control P]

You find it work to remember the zero point of the temperature system (whichever one it is) that you use every single day? Seriously? I wouldn't crow about that if it were me.

If anything Fahrenheit is preferable because there are about 35 units between "annoyingly cold" (55) and "annoyingly warm" (90) rather than 20. Units are irrelevant anyway thanks to dimensional analysis - the only real work is calculating the exact prefactor.

Re:Math

[serviscope_minor]

I never understood why so many people care about the thermometer in relation to when water changes state. Sure a scientist cares, but the average lay person?

Quite. The lay person cares more about the coldest temperature you can get mixing ice with water compared to the body temperature of a cow.

Both C anf F are scales related to real-world things. The choice of things for F is completely off the wall.

Re:Math

[Pf0tzenpfritz]

It's really easy to understand: You take the full range of temperature where liquid water "exists" (in liquid state, at sea level, simply: water) and divide it by 10 sets of fingers to count. 0C Ice. Damn cold. 100C steam. Way too hot. 30C: one third of the way from ice to steam, pleasantly warm. 20 room temperature. Any child can guess what 60C, 10C or 25C will feel like.
Now, if someone came up with a similarly easy way to represent the "degree" sign as HTML. Not even unicode seems to work for me...

Re:Math

[neokushan]

Celsius is directly related to Kelvin, just offset so that 0C is the freezing point of water instead of Absolute zero. It's easy to convert between the two, just +/- 273.15 depending on where you're going. 0C - 273.15 is 0K.

I don't think either counts as "Metric" though since there aren't any milikelvins or anything like that, but you can still have a fraction of either if you want more granularity than a single degree.

I believe Fahrenheit has an equivalent called Rankine, whereby 0Ra is absolute zero and the difference between the two is a fixed value, however that does bring the question - what's the point of 0F? What does it represent? Aside from the benefit of having "more" values between boiling and freezing water, is there a benefit to Fahrenheit that Celsius doesn't have?

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

$8 billion or 75,000 jobs? Damn. :)

Now, before you blame the iPod for the losses of the Media industry, remember that iTunes made them a ton of money, while Apple actually lost Jobs last year.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

Your metric bias is showing. The stuff you talk about in metric is easy because that's what you learned. But there's nothing intuitive about 30% of the way from really cold to really hot being "pleasant". Instinct would suggest the pleasant temperate would be about halfway between the two, but that's actually pretty darn uncomfortable for a human...even deadly hot if you aren't careful.

So you grew up learning 0C is really cold, and 30C is pleasant. Well, I grew up knowing that 80F is quite pleasant (actually, unless you want to go swimming, 70F is more pleasant, but that's probably because it gets pretty humid around here). You say any child can gess what 60C feels like? Well any american child can guess what 140F degrees feels like. Whatever you learned growing up is second nature. One is not more intuitive than the other.

As for the degree symbol, it would seem to be something slashdot does. On slashdot you can use an ampersand followed by lt; to get the "less than" symbol, so slashdot accepts that encoding. So you should be able to use ampersand followed by deg; or #176; but neither work on slashdot. If I create an html file on my desktop and try the same thing, it does work, so I don't know what slashdot is doing.

Re:Math

[MisterMidi]

The degree sign in HTML is . I think it's in the extended ASCII table so you don't need unicode.

Re:Math

[MisterMidi]

Hmm, it went fine in the preview. The HTML code is & deg; without the space.

Re:Math

[guru42101]

The measurements are all based on colloquial measurements, although most of them seem to have increased in size.

Inch: About the width of your thumb
Foot: About the length of your foot, with shoes
Hand: Width of a hand, only used for horse height atm.
Fahrenheit: 100 is about as hot of a day as you'll normally see, 0 is about as cold of a day you'd normally see.
I don't know the sources for volume measurements or care to look them up

Most of the measurements we brought from Europe. For some reason we just won't switch to metric although I'd guess something like 50% in favor, 35% don't care, and 15% are to busy arguing against evolution to respond.

Re:Math

[pakar]

So oh... you increment the month, then day then year?

Re:Math

[pakar]

20 units?? Death to the decimals! or?

Re:Math

[pakar]

Well.. those votes will then belong to China and Russia then ehy? Crap... your debts are contagious..

Re:Math

[lytithwyn]

Folks just have to understand this, and fortunately there's a great instructional video available for those in need of further tutelage.

This is by far the only video I've watched online all week that was truly worth watching. Thanks for the link!

Re:Math

[wed128]

Not only the the point made by my sibling poster (who should be modded up btw), but at least some imperical units were designed for easy divisibility.

12 inches in a foot, for instance. 12 is easily divided by 2, 3, 4, and 6. 10 is only divisible by 1, 2, and 5.

also, volumes are mostly powers of two.
4 tablespoons in a gill, 4 gills in a pint, 2 cups in a pint, 2 pints in a quart, 4 quarts in a gallon, 2 gallons in a peck, 4 pecks in a bushel. We seem to be missing half-bushel, half-gallon, half-pint, and half-gill units, but there you go.

The imperical system may seem arbitrary, but there is justification for a lot of the different units.
that's not to say it's better then the metric system, which makes the math so much easier.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone knows the one true way is YYYY-MM-DD so that the numbers are you know, larger to smaller when reading left to right, like real numbers read. Also easier to sort. So suck on that.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

the benefit of Farenheit is it's measured so 100 degrees is almost as hot as you'll encounter and 0 degrees is almost as cold as you'll see. People like to think of things on a 1-10 or 1-100 scale

Re:Math

[realityimpaired]

Celsius is directly related to Kelvin, just offset so that 0C is the freezing point of water instead of Absolute zero. It's easy to convert between the two, just +/- 273.15 depending on where you're going. 0C - 273.15 is 0K.

It's the other way around, but yes. Celsius was calibrated to the freezing and boiling points of distilled water, and for Kelvins, they said "hey, that's an easy to calibrate scale, but let's set 0 at absolute zero".

I believe Fahrenheit has an equivalent called Rankine, whereby 0Ra is absolute zero and the difference between the two is a fixed value, however that does bring the question - what's the point of 0F? What does it represent? Aside from the benefit of having "more" values between boiling and freezing water, is there a benefit to Fahrenheit that Celsius doesn't have?

0'F is the freezing point of salt water. Which salt water... unknown. It has different freezing points for different salt densities... I think it was supposed to be sea water, but again, sea water has different saline densities depending on where in the world you're taking it from, and also how deep you're taking it from.

100'F was supposed to be the human body temperature, but it was calibrated against somebody who was running a fever that day. Normal human body temperature is supposedly 98.6'F, but it does actually vary from person to person, depending on their health and metabolism at the time.

Ultimately, Fahrenheit is a completely arbitrary scale, calibrated to completely unrelated points in nature, some of which aren't reproducible outside of the human species. The reason it still exists is because it was proposed earlier than the Celcius scale, and it caught ground. Also because the only country that still uses it absolutely refuses to consider anything metric, because the French are using it, and that would be wrong.

Re:Math

[fnj]

It's imperial, not "imperical". But you knew that, since slashdot draws that funny squiggly red line under a misspelled word. My favorite is the 60 units used in the clock. 60 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, and 30. 60, 72, 84, 90, and 96 each have 10 divisors not counting 1 and themselves. Compare to 100, which is only divisible by 2, 4, 5, 10, 20, 25, and 50.

Re:Math

[drinkypoo]

If anything Fahrenheit is preferable because there are about 35 units between "annoyingly cold" (55) and "annoyingly warm" (90) rather than 20.

You would think that, but it turns out you can't actually feel a difference of less than two degrees Fahrenheit anyway, so centigrade actually does make more sense in every way.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

0'F is the freezing point of salt water

Nope. It's the temperature of "a mixture of ice, water, and ammonium chloride, a salt, at a 1:1:1 ratio. This is a frigorific mixture which stabilizes its temperature automatically: that stable temperature was defined as 0 F (17.78 C)." [wikipedia]

Re:Math

[webheaded]

Right, I'm sure it has nothing to do with what an enormous pain in the ass it is to convert the entirety of the United States to a different system of measurement. It's not like this is a big place or anything, we could do it in a weekend. No, it must be because we hate the French.

I mean come on, that's stupid. No one likes the French...it isn't just us. Give us a little credit here.

Re:Math

[serviscope_minor]

Not only the the point made by my sibling poster (who should be modded up btw), but at least some imperical units were designed for easy divisibility.

So, 7 inches is easily divisible by...? You can also buy wooden boards in 2600mm sizes, which is also very easy to divide. The argument about easy divisibility only works for some very specific instances.

also, volumes are mostly powers of two.

While that is admirable from a binary perspective, it's also wildly inconsistent with length measurements. And with itself, because there are actually more volume units in common use. Which is why some things are measured in cubic feet (fans are always in cu ft/min), som in cubic yards (construction) and some in gallons.

One of the handiest things in US units (not imperial) is that 1 pint is 1lb of water. Given that 1l is 1Kg of water, it's not really that much of an advantage.

Oh and then there's bizarro units like the calorie, which is defined in terms of a gram of water.

Re:Math

[MightyYar]

That's best for filenames or anywhere that it will get sorted, but in international correspondence I find that YYYY-MMM-DD in any order is the only unambiguous date format. (e.g. 2001-Jan-01, 01-Jan-2001, Jan-01-2001). The downside is that it is in English, but then again, so is my correspondence :)

Re:Math

[MightyYar]

C is just as arbitrary as F. Temperature scales are one place where the metric system adds nothing of value. Everything must me converted to Kelvin in most useful calculations anyway.

The original F scale was based on the temperature of icy seawater (0) and the human body temperature (100), which are no more or less arbitrary than the boiling and freezing point of pure water. In fact, icy seawater and a human body are much easier to come by, depending on where you live :)

I'm a big fan of meters, grams, and liters - mostly because I work in engineering. But I really don't care what temperature scale I'm working in, except when I'm doing thermodynamic analysis - and even then the conversion is trivial and generally has to be done anyway (because most thermometers are in C or F and not K or R).

Re:Math

[realityimpaired]

Right, I'm sure it has nothing to do with what an enormous pain in the ass it is to convert the entirety of the United States to a different system of measurement. It's not like this is a big place or anything, we could do it in a weekend. No, it must be because we hate the French.

And yet Canada, Russia, China, and several other countries that are bigger, both geographically and by population, had no trouble switching to the metric system. You do realize that Brunei is the only country in the world other than the US that still uses the Imperial system at an official level?

There's a lot of resistance to change in the US, but no more than exists elsewhere in the world. Besides which, do you have any idea how much it's costing industry to have to switch between measurement systems when you move between countries? Several large businesses and industries have already switched themselves over to Metric, because it just makes it easier to work with the rest of the world. It's a question of political will, but it really is about time the US joined the rest of the world in a common measurement system.

The comment about the French was facetious... I'm glad to see it was appreciated.... It was either that, or a joke about Americans being confused by all the multiples of ten.

Re:Math

[LordLimecat]

You have to remember the number whether it is 0 or 32, and trying to quantify the work involved in cognition is a little ridiculous.

Somehow everyone I've ever met who deals with fahrenheit manages to remember that magic number 32 without pulling a muscle, it truly is amazing.

Re:Math

[boaworm]

I'd say road temperature is very important. below zero = freezing = ice, above zero = ok

Re:Math

[ediron2]

You mean like 12 pence to the shilling, 20 shillings to the pound?

A penny had a 1/4th unit called a farthing, too. And check out the origins of 'Pieces of Eight', from spanish gold coins (which were often cut into halves, fourths and eighths).

Have never looked it up, but I suspect these were commonplace because even unschooled math-illiterate people could become competent enough to trust physical/visual math by splitting or combining groups. And that simplicity is essential for easy commerce and employment.

Re:Math

[Malenx]

I love it when people post smart-alec comments while they themselves are misinformed. Slashdot isn't auto-correcting anything, it's your browser.

I also love how chrome wants to correct smartalec to smartypants. :)

Re:Math

[ediron2]

Cool. As for your wondering why no halves, there are plenty of slang terms for half or two. Tuppence = 2 pennies (or pence), ha-penny for half a penny. It'd make sense that measures were done accordingly, where the goal was to create simple units learnable by people regardless of their schooling.

Weirdest in what you've outlined is the 'hop' at gallon-to-peck. Makes me wonder why...

Re:Math

[webheaded]

I think it is partly that it is a pain in the ass to switch and partly that we don't really have to. People cater to us and our stupid measurements and we aren't forced to adapt. When we do finally switch (because it does just need to happen) it will really suck. I recognize that the metric system is superior mathematically, but I cannot think in metric having grown up with the English system. I have no idea how many meters tall I am or how much I weight or any of that. It seems like one of those things that we can "switch" to but will take forever to ACTUALLY switch to because you essentially have to wait for all of us to adapt to it. Hell, plenty of "metric" countries still use non-metric measurements. In Canada they still weigh themselves in pounds half the time and I'm fairly certain they measure their heights by feet still (I talk to Canadians rather frequently). It's an odd hodgepodge of measurements.

Re:Math

[mcgrew]

But you knew that, since slashdot draws that funny squiggly red line under a misspelled word.

1. Slashdot doesn't, your browser does. Unless you're using IE 7 or less, in which case everything is spelled correctly, even grobatrelovs.

2. imperical: originating in or based on observation or experience . Your spell checker doesn't flag it if you're using the wrong word. Substitute "yore" or "your" for "you're" in the previous sentence and it is incorrect but unflagged.

Re:Math

[realityimpaired]

In Canada they still weigh themselves in pounds half the time and I'm fairly certain they measure their heights by feet still (I talk to Canadians rather frequently). It's an odd hodgepodge of measurements.

Yes, and no. I know that I'm 5'11" tall, and that is what I'll usually respond with if I'm asked. I'll also tell you my weight in pounds. I also know that my Ontario driver's license identifies me as being 178cm tall, and that all of my medical paperwork lists my weight in kilograms. The current generation uses metric almost exclusively, but I'm in the transition generation where I was taught both metric and imperial in school, and have no problem switching between the two... such a transition generation is what it'll take in the US, too, because nobody expects anybody over 30 who never learned metric in the first place to start suddenly understanding metric intuitively.

Re:Math

[ravenshrike]

That might be true of air, but trust me when I say you can tell the difference in water.

Re:Math

[pakar]

So still... One day is more than one month?

Re:Math

[DAldredge]

If you can't remember that 32f = freezing you should not be driving a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds.

Re:Math

[Kreigaffe]

55 is annoying cold?

More like refreshingly brisk.

Good god, buy a fucking jacket.

Re:Math

[AmiMoJo]

So just use 12cm or 30cm or whatever is convenient to you. The beauty of the metric system is that you can chose whatever ratios make your task easiest, while maintaining the ability to work easily in decimal for calculation.

Re:Math

[Just Some Guy]

That's important regarding accumulation, but as a previous resident of the American Upper Midwest, I can assure you that driving in sleet is a bitch regardless of the road temperature. If the road is cold, you drive on ice. If the road is warm, you drive on partially melted, wet ice. Knowing whether a given storm system is going to drop rain or sleep can be a life-or-death bit of information.

Re:Math

[StikyPad]

Knowing whether a given storm system is going to drop rain or sleep can be a life-or-death bit of information.

Indeed. Nothing more dangerous than getting caught in a sleep storm when behind the wheel.

Re:Math

[CAIMLAS]

That's a lot better than what the current US administration was able to pull off.

Re:Math

[StikyPad]

Milli- is just a prefix. Technically millikelvin (mK) and even kilokelvin (kK), are valid units and symbols, although they're not commonly used, especially since temperature is rarely measured to the resolution of 10^-3. And kelvin is indeed part of the metric system along with Celsius.

Re:Math

[mcgrew]

It's ° and it doesn't work here. I wish they'd fix that, the degree sign is pretty damned necessary at a science/tech site.

Re:Math

[Just Some Guy]

It's not like this is a big place or anything, we could do it in a weekend

So give up because we can't do it in a weekend? That's dumb. Do it through attrition, over time, for free instead.

To handle distance, pass a regulation that after a certain date, all new Federal highway mileage signs will be printed in both English and metric. After a set period of time - say, 10 years - all new Federal highway mileage signs will be printed in metric only. You have to replace signs anyway as they corrode, get hit by cars, or updated with new information. Take that opportunity to add metric information to them at roughly zero marginal cost.

To handle temperature, direct the National Weather Service to issue reports in metric only. Have the FCC issue a regulation to start giving temperatures in Celsius. This would cost approximately $0 and would inconvenience people for about a week as they re-learn that "0 is cold, but not that cold and 15 is jacket weather".

Really, you're making this a lot harder than it has to be.

Re:Math

[neokushan]

I can set my "furnace" in .5 degree increments. Just saying.

Re:Math

[lyml]

But now you're comparing temperatures with two significant figures to temperatures with three significant figures (99.4 and 98.6 vs 37).

Why not use three significant figures for Celsius as well (since two significant figures for Fahrenheit would give the same issue you're complaining that Celsius has)?

Re:Math

[JWSmythe]

    Pesky little details like that are always ignored in such math.

Re:Math

[drinkypoo]

C is just as arbitrary as F.

But is that true?

Everything must me converted to Kelvin in most useful calculations anyway.

But C to K is easier than F to K.

The original F scale was based on the temperature of icy seawater (0) and the human body temperature (100), which are no more or less arbitrary than the boiling and freezing point of pure water.

Uh no. The boiling and freezing point of pure water are useful information. The temperature of icy seawater matters only to those likely to encounter it.

Re:Math

[drinkypoo]

That might be true of air, but trust me when I say you can tell the difference in water.

I might be able to believe it, but since we're not aquatic mammals, it makes little difference. We talk about the temperature of the air more commonly than the temperature of the water. But since the air doesn't change perceptibly when its temperature changes, we need something else to act as our guide to its temperature. Water makes sense, since water is life.

Re:Math

[MightyYar]

The boiling and freezing point of pure water are useful information.

Freezing? Sure. 32F. There now you are all done :)

Boiling? Even as a mechanical engineer, I never use the boiling point of water for anything. It even changes depending on what altitude you live at. Even if I designed steam plants, I'd have to refer to tables because it varies so much with pressure... so 100C would still be useless. In fact, the boiling point of sugar has been more useful to me (I used to make candy).

So I'd say that in exchange for knowing that water freezes at around 32F, you no longer have to memorize the number 37C for human body temperature. :)

Depressingly, I have both F and C thermometers in the house, so I have to do both.

Re:Math

[drinkypoo]

Ah, but the variation in the boiling point of water varies extremely predictably with pressure, which is one of the really appealing things about it. And indeed, the variation in boiling point due to altitude can never be more than about what, 14.7 degrees? Wait, is that F or C? Now I'm confusing myself ;) Or is it twice that? I often forget this stuff, even though I have an ASE certification in automotive heating and cooling systems, which tells you what those things are good for.

Re:Math

[Kalriath]

Not Brunei - that's metric too. You're thinking of the totalitarian dictatorship, Burma (Myanmar). Also, the pretty much third world country Liberia. Sure got some good company there, USA.

Re:Math

[AgedLion]

If you can't remember that 32f = freezing you should not be driving a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds.

Hmm, OK, I memorized that 32 number.

Now please help me. How many kilograms is thousands of 'pounds'?

Re:Math

[MightyYar]

Yeah, it's pretty clear that F was based on someone with a low-grade fever :)

The ironic thing here is that C no longer is based on the boiling point or freezing point of water, which is a bit too sketchy. It has been re-based to the triple-point of pure water - much like F was originally only for a different solution - and absolute zero. So C is now based on points that measure as -273.15 C and 0.01 C :)

And then to really set the ironic alarms off, F is standardized on the boiling and freezing points of water! So 32 and 212 F... Just like the original Centigrade scale.

Re:Math

[wertigon]

"I recognize that the metric system is superior mathematically, but I cannot think in metric having grown up with the English system."

Thing is, if you don't switch, why should your children switch?

Re:Math

[FictionPimp]

You would think now is the time. They are willing to do all sorts of pointless things to make more jobs. What would make more jobs than retrofitting all that equipment out there (or making new equipment) to use the metric system.

Gas stations alone would take a decade of stable work.

Re:Math

[Anguirel]

Seriously?

Here's a simple one: It's winter. You have to drive somewhere. Is there likely to be ice on the roads you need to look out for? You check the thermometer.

It's near zero centigrade = there's likely to be ice. Simple & intuitive. Whereas with fahrenheit, you actually need to remember the number which represents water freezing. More work for no gain.

But.. you're wrong. If you have to drive somewhere, you check the thermometer. If it's 0 Centigrade, you're fine. The salt trucks will clear it right up, roads will be fine. If it's below 0 Fahrenheit, you need to deal with ice and the sand trucks come out instead. What, you though the Fahrenheit 0 point was arbitrary? It's not. It's the lowest freezing point depression for water.

Feeling hot? Probably because it's getting close to 100 degrees, which is human body temperature (ok, yes, more refined measurements changed that to 98.6, and they never re-calibrated the scale). As opposed to remembering that 37 is human body temperature in Centigrade.

Simple and Intuitive, whereas with Centigrade, you need to remember some arbitrary values. More work for no gain.

Re:Math

[j-beda]

The majority of english speaking countries weren't totally metric until Canada changed. And yet, Canadians still measure everything in inches and feet. The only thing they switched to was kilometers and litres. For the normal person everything else is still imperial.

I don't know what you mean by "everything else" - what else doe people measure on a regular basis? Temps are all in C.

The things that Canadians do in non-metric units are pretty much limited to the infleuence of their largest trading partner doing so much in non-metric units. Baking and hardware store stuff is pretty much the only place the "average" person is forced to play with Imperial units.

This is end of democracy

[lorinc]

Or at least, a visible proof of it. Perhaps it ended long ago, but now there is no possible denial.

Re:This is end of democracy

[TapeCutter]

This is end of democracy

Parody or paranoia? I can never tell these days.

Re:This is end of democracy

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't even pretend we're not corrupt as hell anymore.

Re:This is end of democracy

[lexsird]

You can be a democratic socialist. Democracy means basically the majority rules. If the majority is socialistic, then you will see socialistic policies in place.

Relax Francis.

Re:This is end of democracy

[silanea]

Since its foundation? Do you even know what the EU is? Socialist is pretty much the least applicable term. It is, first and foremost, a trade market. Everything else it does is "collateral damage", aimed at stabilising said market.

Re:This is end of democracy

[cbope]

Wow, get out of your parent's basement much? Hint: It's now 2012.

Re:This is end of democracy

[lordholm]

Hard right wing anti-unionist people call the EU socialist.
Hard left wing anti-unionist people call the EU capitalist.

Neither of these two groups are right.

Re:This is end of democracy

[Pryon]

To righties in the US, spending money on something they don't like is called socialism.

Re:This is end of democracy

[L4t3r4lu5]

This is end of democracy

Parody or paranoia? I can never tell these days.

Statement of fact? A democratic vote where the total amount of votes exceed the electorate is indeed an indication of the fall of democracy. The electorate can no longer demonstrate their views democratically, therefore democracy has failed.

I foresee a swelling in attendees of the Occupy camps.

Re:This is end of democracy

[fnj]

Both groups are right.

Re:This is end of democracy

[bmajik]

In fact, democracy is always socialist, since both are the supression of the individual at the whim of some larger group.

The very idea of "majority rules" is socialist.

The US was notably _not_ a democracy. It is interesting that certain of our politicians have claimed otherwise at every possible opportunity.

What is their motive for this obfuscation?

Re:This is end of democracy

[SwedishPenguin]

The EU is a neoliberal project seeking to further enrich the elite and has been from the beginning. What does it have to do with the discussion at hand though?

It seems that you do not understand what socialism is. In its most basic form (there are many, many branches of socialism), it is in ideology striving for a society where the workers own the means of production instead of as is the case now (and especially in the past decades) when the capitalist class owns the means of production. The goal is essentially a classless society, though it should be noted that this does not necessarily mean that there are no differences between people, just that they are not so wide as they are today. In Marxist analysis, society is divided into two classes, the working class and the capitalist class, the capitalist class is what we in today's terminology would call the "one percent", the people on top who have enough capital to survive merely on the returns of capital without actually having to work, this is the type of class-society that socialism aims to get rid of.

Regarding democracy, I would say it's not possible to have a democracy in a society where such a small elite owns so much wealth while the rest has so little and is mostly in debt to the elite by way of bank loans. The elite simply has too much power, even if you restrict campaign funding by law, they will always have influence over the politicians much moreso than the common man, meaning democracy, i.e. the rule of the people, is essentially null and void.

What we have is a plutocratic system, we've had it for a long time, it's just getting more and more obvious now that the elite has amassed so much wealth and power and any safeguards put in place in our "democratic" institutions completely crumble. Why do you think we get all these new laws: ACTA, Data retention, IPRED, etc? Do you seriously think all these laws of late were the will of the people? No, they were the will of the capital, the will of the small elite that essentially controls the world economy.

Re:This is end of democracy

[TapeCutter]

Ignoring your attempt to equate "fall of democracy" and "democracy has failed" to the original "end to democray". Simple logic says that if any single corrupt election was an "end to democray" then democracy would have ceased to exist long before it did any good.

I forsee a swelling in garbage collectors wallets.

Is this unexpected?

[cold fjord]

Europeans often point out to Americans the higher turn-outs in their elections. They aren't quite to up Chicago standards, but it is a respectable showing none the less.

Start the Day with Some Eurocrat Bashing

It's only a committee

[SecurityTheatre]

It's worth pointing out that it's only a preliminary committee. It being voted down in this committee won't necessarily prevent it from seeing the floor the full parliament, but it won't come along with the backing of the special committee.

There was a member of the Swedish Pirate Party in the committee and he's been the one agitating for a re-vote. The frightening thing about this is that there are only 24 members on this committee and one was absent, so with 23 possible votes, the final vote was 12-14.

BUT, if 12 people actually voted in favour of the bill, that would leave only 11 against.

Keep in mind, this isn't highly corrosive stuff.

The bill is talking about "orphaned works" which are those works that will never again see the light of day because no owner claims them. It is likely that when the copyright expires in 70 years, with nobody to preserve them, or assign their rights to a publisher who can, these works will be completely lost to humanity. This legislation would seek to prevent this and increase the overall value to humanity with NO money lost by putting them in public domain.

Nobody is arguing that this is a bad idea, but the recording industry lobbies see it as the "sharp end of the sword" when it comes to copyright reform, so they will fight against it vehemently.

If you live in Europe, write to your MEP. Vote fraud is no joke.

Re:It's only a committee

[Znork]

This legislation would seek to prevent this and increase the overall value to humanity with NO money lost by putting them in public domain.

As there is a vast overproduction of entertainment today the competition is for the consumers time. Thus, any material that is presented for free cuts into the revenue stream of the for-profit production companies, and even worse, entrenches the idea that entertainment might come for free.

Remember, these companies consider basically any time spent not giving them money stealing.

Re:It's only a committee

[sixtyeight]

The bill is talking about "orphaned works" which are those works that will never again see the light of day because no owner claims them. It is likely that when the copyright expires in 70 years, with nobody to preserve them, or assign their rights to a publisher who can, these works will be completely lost to humanity.

Wait. Don't most of our historical documents and records meet this description? Yow!

Nobody is arguing that this is a bad idea, but the recording industry lobbies see it as the "sharp end of the sword" when it comes to copyright reform, so they will fight against it vehemently.

Oh. Well at least it's for a good cause.

Re:It's only a committee

[jonwil]

How do you determine what is an orphan work? (and who gets to make that determination?)
I bet Warner or Fox or MGM or Sony or EMI or Universal or Electronic Arts or Disney or any other major entity with a large body of work will have all kinds of things they own the copyright to but dont even know they own. (including all the stuff they may have picked up through acquisitions and mergers)

Re:It's only a committee

[SuricouRaven]

I'm guessing a lot of those works could be identified by someone skilled in searching historical records (And I mean pre-internet here, going through old microfilms) and paid to put in enough hours. So it's only if they become popular again that there will be any reason even for potential copyright holders to invest the time in figuring out if they own it.

Re:It's only a committee

[TapeCutter]

Here's a contribution that I'm sure you will find useful. Look up the definition of "summary".

Re:It's only a committee

[dido]

One way to do it would be to pay a tax for everything that you want to keep under copyright. This could be a token tax even as low as â1 per work per year, but not paying the tax would place the work in the public domain. These folks are so keen to sue whenever they see someone violating their copyrights they ought to know what copyrights they own. This way the government has a tax record that can tell everyone who owns what.

Re:It's only a committee

[martin-boundary]

The bill is talking about "orphaned works" which are those works that will never again see the light of day because no owner claims them. It is likely that when the copyright expires in 70 years, with nobody to preserve them, or assign their rights to a publisher who can, these works will be completely lost to humanity.

If you live in Europe, write to your MEP. Vote fraud is no joke.

Who cares? If you live in Europe, or anywhere else for that matter, start scanning those books and put them up on the web. There are places like formerly library.nu (now defunct) which will accept the scans, and replicate them. Fuck the publishers, and fuck the politicians. They can't be trusted with our human heritage.

Re:It's only a committee

[lexsird]

The Recording Industries, when are they going to be chased down by howling lynch mobs in the streets? I want to know, because I want to get it recorded.

Re:It's only a committee

[Hentes]

Easy: it's impossible to purchase. You either sell the stuff, or lose the right to it.

Re:It's only a committee

[MysteriousPreacher]

A tax or any other kind of payment would be complicated to administer. It'd require clever handling of works that are published and developed over time - such as a Wikipedia page or OpenSSH.

With any copyright discussion, the elephant in the room has to be the length of copyright terms. Drop the terms down to far more reasonably limits and we see many such problems go away. Publishers can continue to benefit from older works, so long as they can find ways to enhance them, thus creating a derivative work that is subject to a fresh copyright term. They already do this for movies, either through adding fresh content or by remastering.

Why we allow copyright beyond 15 years for anything at all is to me a travesty. A publisher that cannot make a reasonable return within 15 years really should think long and hard about their business model and the quality of their work.

Re:It's only a committee

[Anonymous Coward]

The sad thing is, hundreds and perhaps thousands of films and sound recordings created before the mid 1960's are deteriorating at such a rapid rate that by the time any of this copyright mess ever gets sorted, they'll be gone forever.

Huge numbers of them are rotting away in vaults, with even well-known films such as Gone With The Wind apparently having to be made from later copies now because the original film masters are basically rotted to nothing.

Some Hollywood studios have however, invested the proper resources into caring for these historical cultural artifacts. Disney for one, keeps their film stock in better climate-controlled condition than the US Government keeps the Constitution.

There's a reason movies like Peter Pan and Lady and the Tramp are in the vault for the next 50 years. It was determined that they would create new digital masters of the films and keep the originals stored safely while we wait for better and more permanent storage options to be invented for film transfer - in which case they will make new masters on that storage medium with the current digital masters used to work as a clean copy in case of further film deterioration of the original stock. Then the originals will more than likely finally be destroyed just due to rot and the process of transfer.

Re:It's only a committee

[Thing 1]

Orphaned work? See "Song of the South". Zippity-do-dah.

Re:It's only a committee

[Hognoxious]

the elephant in the room has to be the length of copyright terms.

So that's why they last for ever - they say elephants never forget...

Re:It's only a committee

[MysteriousPreacher]

I see what you did thar!

If you die today, your estate will only have until 2082 to profit from that post. (although technically it's probably too short to protect)

Re:It's only a committee

[afidel]

MGM Universal likewise has a very impressive vault system (or so I've been told, never worked there but had a contractor who was working for both us and them).

Re:It's only a committee

[afidel]

This would be in violation of the Berne Convention.

vote fraud

[From A Far Away Land]

I guess that's the next step for the Conservatives in Canada... instead of suppressing the vote by misdirecting people away from polls, they'll just send 110% of the electorate to ensure victory.

Democracy is withering all over the world, as good people do... not quite enough.

99%?

[Zoolander]

You americans with your puny 99%. This parliament goes to 113!

How can that even happen?

[artor3]

This isn't some big election with millions of votes getting counted. This is 23 people in a room, 12 on one side, 11 on the other, and the eleven declaring themselves the victors while the twelve just shrug and accept it. Do the people on this committee care so little for democracy that they just blithely accept it when their opponents' imaginary friends cast ballots?

Re:How can that even happen?

[wvmarle]

A re-vote was requested, immediately when this discrepancy came to light. Which I may assume is the moment the results are given - it's not that hard to add up.

This re-vote was denied however, leaving two important questions open. How come the votes were counted so wrong, with so small numbers? And why was this re-vote denied?

Re:How can that even happen?

[Anonymous Coward]

Better question: Why isn't a re-vote automatic in this kind of circumstance? Or, why is it even possible to deny a re-vote after such an obvious error? This is why politicians fail us...anyone with half a brain would implement more sensible procedures.

Re:How can that even happen?

[sixtyeight]

I was about to make a smug comment about how those zany citizens in Europe need to demand better accountability from their political representatives.

Then I remember that I live in this U.S.. Where the politicians have purported to make this law, despite the Constitution rendering it void the moment it was penned. And then people salute it regardless, because it was signed and must therefore be official.

Re:How can that even happen?

[sixtyeight]

For those of you playing at home, the link that Slashdot invisibled from my post was: http://nothingchanged.org/

Re:How can that even happen?

[wvmarle]

I've the feeling that US politicians have less accountability than European politicians. Well save the ones on EU parliament maybe...

And in this committee case, I would expect the votes are not anonymous. So it should be known who voted how. That's at least the normal situation when votes are done - and how voters can know how certain politicians think. I hope the case will roll on a bit, not as much because it's about copyright but for the apparent vote discrepancy. I'd really like to know how that came to be.

Re:How can that even happen?

[pegasustonans]

This isn't some big election with millions of votes getting counted. This is 23 people in a room, 12 on one side, 11 on the other

Yes, this is exactly the situation. Say I'm a big multi-national corporation...

Show me the contact info for millions of people. Sorry, but I'll just pass that on to marketing for now.

Now, give me the run-down on 23 people in a room making decisions on copyright reform. Wait, there's no need, I already know about them, and, what's more, their checks are in the mail.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Europe. They get cheques, not checks.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Kvan]

At least politicians in the US are actually elected, unlike the European Commission.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Kentari]

No, they don't. Come back when the US elects their secretaries directly as well.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Anonymous Coward]

At least transparency is given in the EU. Pretty much every committee session is recorded, streamed live and can be viewed at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees, and parliamentary debates are open for the public anyway. The problem is just that no one really bothers looking at it, but at least the EU parliament is taking efforts to make their work publicly transparent.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Rockoon]

And why was this re-vote denied?

Just theorizing here..

It seems to me that re-votes could be frowned upon because the act of releasing the results of the first vote might effect the second votes outcome.

The problem isnt this specific vote. The problem is obviously their voting method. Holding a re-vote doesn't address the problem.

Re:How can that even happen?

[lightknight]

Never going to happen. One of the perks of our 'democracy' is the ability to appoint your friends to power without interference from the voters.

Re:How can that even happen?

[wvmarle]

At least the members of European parliament are directly elected.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Anonymous Coward]

And why was this re-vote denied?

Are you dense? I think it's fairly obvious. The motion to re-vote was overruled, 14-12

Re:How can that even happen?

[zill]

How come the votes were counted so wrong, with so small numbers?

26 is not a small number for politicians. They can't even count that high after taking off their shoes and socks.

Re:How can that even happen?

[dkleinsc]

Or, more likely, the chair making the revote decision was on the side that conjured up the 3 phantom votes.

Re:How can that even happen?

[Shoe Puppet]

And we use those about as much as we use floppy discs.

Re:How can that even happen?

[willpb]

"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes." (Josef Stalin)

The same kind of stuff probably goes on all the time in caucus meetings, primaries and elections. We only ever hear about the most egregious cases.

Re:How can that even happen?

[mark-t]

Then it seems that given that there are more votes than people, that the vote should still be declared void, unless the winning vote won by an amount that exceeds the extra votes.

If they don't do that, then they defeat the entire point of bothering to vote at all.

Re:How to get what you want...

[khallow]

It might as well had been the people voting against the reform doing it, knowing it would be scrapped because they didn't expect to win if the vote had commenced in a proper way.

They could have just retaken the vote, this time making sure people didn't cast a vote more than once. Getting a proper vote tally isn't rocket science.

Balance that out

[lucm]

Just send them a few of the negative votes received by Al Gore in Florida, then the universe will be in equilibrium again.

Time to complain...

[solidraven]

I don't know about you guys. But I'm writing a complaint and asking for an investigation into this later today. These sort of things are simply unacceptable and should be stopped, no matter what the subject of the vote is.

democracy in action

[evanism]

We don't have one. The Yanks don't have one, nor do the poms.

When was the last time THE PEOPLE had a REAL VOTE on how their country worked?

What we have is an obscene extension of the patent system extended into a politically domineering overlord system. We vote for a bunch of self interested morons to make stupendously bad decisions, rewarded richly for doing nothing or worse, followed by being given the chance to revote on our next oppressors when the previous ones fail (but only when they let us).

This isn't democracy. As article shows, it is corrupt.

This one billion line program has been hacked together for too many years. Too many exceptions. Time for a rewrite.

Re:democracy in action

[temcat]

Recently, the Swiss successfully voted on not increasing the number of vacation days and not regulating book prices.

Re:democracy in action

[Anonymous Coward]

You have a vote. Unfortunately you squander it, voting for the indistinguishable main parties, in a desperate attempt not to "lose". It's not a game. Vote for the individuals you want to represent you. It doesn't matter if they lose. It doesn't matter what party they represent. Vote for the individual, make it clear you're voting for the individual and tell everyone you know that you're voting for the individual.

Over time, we'll have a good old tyranny of the majority again instead of this modern tyranny of the statu quo bollocks.

Re:democracy in action

[dkleinsc]

When was the last time THE PEOPLE had a REAL VOTE on how their country worked?

In Ohio, November 8, 2011: After getting the requisite number of signatures, a law that would have banned collective bargaining by public worker unions (similar to what Scott Walker wanted to do in Wisconsin that sparked so much protest there) was voted down by about a 3-2 margin. The reason the citizens of Ohio could do that was because about 120 years ago, there was a Progressive movement that took over several states and demanded that they institute the ability for citizens to force a referendum on any law passed, and also demanded that citizens be given the chance to vote on an official remaining in office before their term would normally be up (recall).

Now, as far as nationally is concerned, then you're partially right, but states and cities often have real elections.

Re:democracy in action

[steelfood]

The Swiss are the exception, not the norm. They are a reasonable, intelligent, and secure people, a characterization which applies to almost every individual in the country as opposed to a very small minority present in every other country. I'm not sure what they did in their few centuries of history, but they sure as hell did something right.

Re:democracy in action

[krouic]

And the Swiss also refused joining the EU...

Great News For The US Trade Imbalance!

[FairAndHateful]

It looks like they've managed to export the Diebold voting machines!

The minutes of the meeting disagree

[Epimer]

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&reference=PE-483.867&format=PDF&language=EN&secondRef=01

"The Committee adopted the amended Commission proposal and the draft legislative resolution by 22 votes in favour and 1 abstention"

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes they adopted the amended proposal. But the vote this article is about is a vote on an amendment, not the adoption of the proposal.

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[repvik]

Parent needs to be modded up.

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[repvik]

Falkvinge refers to that meeting i JURI on march 1st. Nowhere in the minutes is the voting results he refers to mentioned. Where are those?

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Anti-EU story turns out to be manufactured or grossly exaggerated. Color me surprised. If these kind of stories didn't turn out to be BS 99% of the time, I'd be a lot more concerned.

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&reference=PE-483.867&format=PDF&language=EN&secondRef=01

"The Committee adopted the amended Commission proposal and the draft legislative resolution by 22 votes in favour and 1 abstention"

This is apparently about a vote on one of the amendments to the proposal. The minutes linked in the parent list accepted amendments, but don't give votes on the individual amendments. Similarly, the committee voting records ( see here ) don't seem to include the outcomes. It should be possible to check however, as the meetings are recorded:
The vote occurred during this session
Unfortunately, the wmv sound doesn't seem to work with flip4mac and I get all interpretations at the same time, so I can't check it now.

Re:The minutes of the meeting disagree

[Derek Pomery]

Update from the article...

UPDATE 2, VIDEO DOCUMENTATION: Many have been asking for proof or documentation beyond eyewitnesses, and the swarm delivers, here in the shape of user JPMH on Slashdot. JPMH writes, âoeThe agenda item starts at 10:27 [in the linked video], and the voting runs from 10:31 to 10:51. The amendment in question appears to be âoeCompromise 20â, voted on at 10:39, which is indeed rejected by 12 votes to 14.â

lol

[shiftless]

I know right

Sad times we're living in..

The EU parliament is precious

[peppepz]

I think it's nice to add, as a background to the discussion, that each of the invaluable members of the European Parliament earns something like 6,200 € a month, plus 304 € for each day they're actually at the parliament, plus 4,299 € to cover general expenses, plus up to 19,709 € to pay their assistants. Of course you can't afford to pay train tickets with such a wage, so they also get their housing and transportation costs reimbursed. After they're done with their precious services, they'll get a pension of 1,392 € a month for a single mandate, 2,784 € for two, and 5,569 € if they've stayed in the parliament for more than 20 years.

It's normal that after taking all that public money, they want to give 113% of their energies, in order not to let the community down.

This may be an error

[SecurityTheatre]

As someone pointed out below, the actual legislation passed by a vote of 22-0-1.

There is perhaps some amendment that failed under unusual circumstances, but I can't find it anywhere in the documentation.

Working mothers?

[Sneeka2]

A lot of members must've brought their kids to work that day.

Text of proposal

[Carthag]

Can be found here: http://pippi.euwiki.org/doc/CELEX:52011PC0289:EN

Interesting stuff, hopefully it'll eventually pass. In short, if you do a "diligent search" and are unable to locate a rightsholder, the work will be considered orphan. This is basically an area "between" copyright and public domain; you're allowed to reproduce the work "for the purposes of digitization, making available, indexing, cataloguing, preservation or restoration."

Re:Text of proposal

[SuricouRaven]

But how much is dilligent? Somehow I doubt a fre google queries will count. Large companies may be able to hire a historian to go and trawl through old newspapers of the period looking for advertisments or reading actor biographies in hope of finding a passing reference, but that effectively excludes amateurs who don't have the time or money for that level of checking.

Re:Text of proposal

[Carthag]

But how much is dilligent? Somehow I doubt a fre google queries will count. Large companies may be able to hire a historian to go and trawl through old newspapers of the period looking for advertisments or reading actor biographies in hope of finding a passing reference, but that effectively excludes amateurs who don't have the time or money for that level of checking.

It's actually defined int he text too.

#Article 3 Diligent search
31. For the purposes of establishing whether a work is an orphan work, the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) shall ensure that a diligent search is carried out for each work, by consulting the appropriate sources for the category of works in question.

32. The sources that are appropriate for each category of works shall be determined by each Member State, in consultation with rightholders and users, and include, the sources listed in the Annex.

33. A diligent search is required to be carried out only in the Member State of first publication or broadcast.

34. Member States shall ensure that the results of diligent searches carried out in their territories are recorded in a publicly accessible database.

So it seems that each state will define some central rights repository or authority, maybe the national libraries?

Re:Text of proposal

[Carthag]

Doy, there's a whole list of appropiate sources at the end of the document.

Funny it it were true

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be funny if the story was actually true. However, the official press release of the EU parliament states:

"MEPs (Members of the european parliament) unanimously approved a mandate for Lidia Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D, PL), to start talks with the Council to agree reach an agreement on the legislation.

Ms Geringer de Oedenberg said "This regulation would finally make it possible to get some hidden treasures out of the closet and make them available to the general public. Now it is time to start negotiating with national governments and stand up for our points"."

So to sum it up, one wannabe journalist/blogger picks up something from an unreliable source, quotes an MEP who didn't even post anything about this "scandal" on his own blog, and suddenly this is big news?

Re:Funny it it were true

[carlhaagen]

I'm not sure if you are referring to Rickard Falkvinge as the "wannabe journalist/blogger" or as the "unreliable source". Do you even know the first thing about his political efforts? Do you even know who he is?

Rubbish

[Kupfernigk]

The main reasons for the negativity directed against the EU in the UK are:

• Rupert Murdoch wanted the UK to be a low-cost production area for his newspapers with poor worker protection - the EU prevents that
• If the EU survives its early problems - so far no Civil War like the one the USA had on its way to union - it will eventually have more power than the US, and the US doesn't like that
• Most European countries have standards of journalism which embarrass the likes of the Sun and the Mail - even Bild is moving up market slowly - and UK media owners are afraid of EU regulation
• Small Conservative businesses who don't see why they shouldn't exploit their workforces
• People who still think there is a British Empire.

Personally, I feel that the European parliament is far more likely to do the right thing than the British one, simply because (a) it is far more diverse and (b) it has members from countries who know that war is a really bad thing.

What was the count on the decision not to revpte?

[IBitOBear]

It's a case of who watches the watchers. When you corrupt an organization it is best done in-depth and it is most successfully done from the top.

We "Americans" (e.g. the United States of part, but we are working diligently on spreading our scheme to the rest of America) have a system of Checks and Balances. That is it doesn't have to Balance if you can make sure nobody Checks. We use this system for nearly every purpose. It's nice to see Europe following our lead. Or perhaps they deeded it to us as some point, which doesn't matter, we will take the credit.

As to this being the end of democracy, well you are using the wrong definition: Democracy is the means by which we ensure we are governed -no- -better- that we deserve.

Seems to be working out pretty much "as expected" here.

Use of the word Basically

[IBitOBear]

The word "basically" is improper in your last sentence. It should be removed, or replaced with the word "provably".

See..grammar natzi-ism -can- be used to advance the dialog... 8-)

Video of the voting

[JPMH]

Video of the voting is available on the EP website. The agenda item starts at 10:27, and the voting runs from 10:31 to 10:51. The amendment in question appears to be "Compromise 20", voted on at 10:39, which is indeed rejected by 12 votes to 14. This was an all-party amendment that the centre-right EPP party then withdrew support from, because they were not entirely happy with the wording, according to one of their MEPs at the start of the meeting. (10:29). As the video shows, the EP tends to machine-gun through amendment votes, which are held in one swoop after months of discussion. You really need the papers for the meeting and your preferred faction's voting guide to turn them into an acceptable spectator sport. One of the extra votes could perhaps have been the chairman's casting vote; but it's not clear how there could have been two.

Re:Video of the voting

[JPMH]

The agenda papers for the committee meeting can be found here.

It includes the following documents for this dossier:

* Text proposed by the EU Commission
* Committee rapporteur's draft report, with her proposed amendments (1 to 48)
* Amendments proposed by other members of the committee (49 to 170)
* Opinion of the Culture committee (CULT), and their proposed amendments (CULT 1 to CULT 55)
* Opinion of the committee on the Internal Market (IMCO), and their proposed amendments (IMCO 1 to 41).

Unfortunately there does not appear to be a copy of the "Compromise Amendments", including the disputed amendment in question, "Compromise 20". One of the MEPs complains in the video at the end of the agenda item (10:51) that the text of these were only circulated on the night before the meeting.

It's not unusual for new texts to appear as heads get bashed together in the days immediately before the actual voting (in fact, it is an essential part of the system); but in this case they don't appear to have been placed on the website, or at any rate I didn't know where to find them.

The amended report from JURI, consolidating the results of these votes, appears now to have been formally prepared with the document reference A7-0055/2012, though I couldn't find the text of it yet on the Parliament website. This will now go forward for a short debate before the whole parliament, before voting on the amendments proposed by JURI, the amendments proposed by the other two committees, and any other amendments to the Commission text proposed by a sufficient number of MEPs.

Re:Video of the voting

[next_ghost]

Text of Compromise 20 (AMC 20) can be found on page 28 of this document which I found on publications page of JURI under "Votes".

In other bizarre news..

[Anonymous Coward]

only 24 votes for the 754 members of the EU parliament.
Or TFS & headline are misleading.
(for those too lazy: it was a committee, not the EU parliament. Nice editing work there.).

not a hoax.

[Anonymous Coward]

mods, please see this:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2728627&cid=39375277
then mod this down.

Re:not a hoax.

[poetmatt]

RTFA.

It pretty much does explain this.

Re:not a hoax.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently it can be seen on the video recording of the meeting (can't watch since I am at work now), but the story is grossly exaggerated. The vote in question was not about the proposal itself, but some obscure amendment where one party still wanted some more discussions on the exact wording. If you see how these comittees usually go through votes on amendments at machine gun speed where every member just looks at his party-approved voting sheet, it's easy to understand that these things happen from time to time. And since the vote was for an obscure amendment to a non-binding recommendation to let someone negotiate on the topic with the commission, then I completely understand that it was just brushed over (even though it shouldn't happen)

Re:not a hoax.

[moggie_xev]

I emailed 3 of my MEP's and I have received this reply form one

Thank you for this. No, Andrew was not aware of this matter; but we have since looked into it and indeed discovered that although a great deal of confusion reigned over the vote in question the extra voters appear not to have affected the material outcome. At any rate, as you know, the final legislative votes will take place in plenary and not in committee, and my Liberal colleagues will ensure that we will table appropriate amendments.

You may be interested, therefore, in my recent proposal to change the rules of procedure of the House to insist on roll call votes at every legislative vote at committee stage (see website).

Thank you again for writing.

Yours sincerely,



Kilian Bourke
Caseworker to
Andrew Duff
Liberal Democrat MEP for the East of England

Re:not a hoax.

[dreamchaser]

RTFA.

It pretty much does explain this.

Not really. It basically says "I checked with the source and the source said it was true." I wasn't saying it is not true, just asking for some actual fact checking.

Seems unverifiably

[Pf0tzenpfritz]

While actually everone jumps on the train and covers this story it still seems to be almost completely unverified. The linked article links to a single blog post that does not contain a single link to anything. No protocol. Not even any source that would mention that said vote has happened at all.

Re:Seems unverifiably

[Xphile101361]

You mean besides what another slashdot user already found? http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2728627&cid=39375277

Re:Seems unverifiably

[Pf0tzenpfritz]

...which doesn't show anything but the agenda to me. So at least they have voted. I wonder how anyone else got to view the video - all I get is an empty RTSP stream.

Re:How to get what you want...

[lightknight]

And yet some people would have you believe it is...

The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[Anonymous Coward]

The freezing point is that of Brine (IIRC) at saturation. Since small impurities in *pure* water make a huge difference in the freezing point, but bugger all difference in brine, brine water is a lot easier to see freezing reliably to calibrate your lowest temperature. And a saturated brine solution is easy: keep adding salt until it starts precipitating out, then decant off the top.

Simple. You don't need a pristine chemistry lab to set that.

And as for "boiling point of water", well, what pressure?

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[realityimpaired]

And as for "boiling point of water", well, what pressure?

STP. ambient temperature of 0'C, and pressure of 100KPa.

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[serviscope_minor]

Simple. You don't need a pristine chemistry lab to set that.

All metrology is done to astonishingly high precision and does need pristine laboratories whatever the scale. What made sense in the mid 1700's probabl yisn't so much of a concern now.

And as for "boiling point of water", well, what pressure?

Mean atmospheric pressure at sea level, which Celsius calibrated for at about the same time that Fahrenheit decided to use mammalian body temperature, which is also not well controlled.

Both systems are quite arbitrary, but when it comes to relation to physical situations, I would guess that more people have experience with freezing water than saturated water-salt-ammonia mixtures.

But the best reason for Celsius is that it is part of the metric system which is frankly superior to the imperial one in pretty much evey way, even if there's not a hugh different in the temperature part of the system.

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[The Immutable]

I live in Iowa. Temperature here goes from about 0F to about 100F over the year, give or take 5 degrees. It's pretty convenient. Also if the metric system is so great, why doesn't anybody use gradians?

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[Just Some Guy]

I lived in Nebraska until January, and the temperature went from -25C to 40C over the year, give or take 3 degrees. Is that so terribly much harder?

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[hankwang]

"Since small impurities in *pure* water make a huge difference in the freezing point, but bugger all difference in brine,"

The freezing point depression of water is 3.7 K for every mol/l of dissolved salt (assuming two mol ions per mol salt). Adding the same impurity to the saturated brine will lower the freezing point by the same amount as for pure water. Moreover, medium hard water is about 1 mmol/l, so it's just a few mK error anyway.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freezing_point_depression

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[mathfeel]

You are right. The freezing and boiling point of water depends on temperature. But that is no longer used as the definition of C. The new official definition is with -273.15C being absolute zero and 0.01C being the triple point of water. Both of these temperature are fixed and do not depends on additional thermodynamic parameters.

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[dutchd00d]

Ah. A temperature scale based on what's convenient in Iowa. Good choice.

Re:The choice for F has a lot of sense in it

[The Immutable]

It is a good choice. For, y'know, the United States. Where Iowa is. Which might explain why we use it.

Is there a valid source on this?

[Karmashock]

This just seem to be a bunch of blogs linked to each other. Where can we verify that 113% percent voted? I have no idea what that means.

The automatic assumption is that there was voter fraud but it's possible there is some procedural thing going on here. I have no way to verify anything because these links always use themselves or a sister site for authentication. That doesn't work.

Anyone have a legitimate link?

Re:Is there a valid source on this?

[WrecklessSandwich]

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees/video?event=20120301-0900-COMMITTEE-JURI&category=COMMITTEE&format=wmv Only managed to get it to play in IE.

Re:Is there a valid source on this?

[Karmashock]

You'd think one of the newspapers would crow about this if it were true. I mean, some of them are anti EU... it's sorta suspicious that none of them are... suggests that this might not be accurate. Just a feeling...

Metric system

[Anonymous Coward]

Crazy Metric system, we Americans will never understand it... Wait, they vote in Metric, right?

healthy democracy

[ukemike]

High voter turn out is a sign of a healthy democracy.

Dammit, why'd you have to mention date ordering

[Medievalist]

Wow, here I was, all set to point out that the (European) system of feet & inches is actually more far useful for human purposes, which is why we Americans purposely chose it over the (French) metric system long ago.

More whole divisors is functionally far better, if you are an actual working man with dirt on your hands and not some uncalloused, useless ivory tower knowitall.

But then I saw the pyramids at the bottom of your infographic. D'OH! Yeah, you win, you're right, we're complete idiots. The American system of date ordering (which is officially & legally not the American system, by the way, but in practice is what actual Americans insist on using no matter how many times our government tells us not to) is moronic and counterproductive nonsense. There's no good reason to put dates in anything other than dd-mm-yyyy format, it's completely indefensible. We're just stupid.

Re:Dammit, why'd you have to mention date ordering

[ravenshrike]

Bullshit. It's the most useful system for filing since generally files are already separated by year and you read left to right. Thus going from bigger to smaller. Even if files are not separated by year there are more than enough files in any given year to have a large tab denoting overall year.

Re:Dammit, why'd you have to mention date ordering

[Eraesr]

You seem upset.

Guess I proved my American heritage there

[Medievalist]

I just proved that I'm stupid, by writing dd-mm-yyyy when I meant yyyy-mm-dd, which is the most logical order and trivially sorts clean.

Brits more like the Yanks than last thought

[Locutus]

NoMSG

LoB

Yay Democracy!

[Tastecicles]

See? Europe works! NOT!

15 years is way too short

[Optic7]

As long as the public values and demands a work, the original creator of the work should be able to continue benefiting from it. The original creator, not the publisher or other middle-men, or the kids or grand-kids of the creator.

So yes, author's lifetime + 70 years is ridiculous. Date of publication + 70 is more reasonable. The number of years after creation is up for discussion, but the clock should never start after the death of the author. I don't understand what the logic was of counting the time that way.

There is definitely room and a need for copyright reform, but not how some people want it, which is basically akin to forcing people to give their creations away for free after a few years, and is an extreme at the other end of the spectrum of what the media conglomerates want but an extreme just the same.

The comparison that some people make, "I'm not getting paid for work I did 10 years ago, so artists shouldn't either" doesn't make sense for a couple of reasons: a) the work you did was most likely paid for in the form of a salary, which is usually not the case for artists and other creators; b) the work you did 10 years ago most likely has little to no value today, and could probably not be sold even if you wanted it to, unlike popular works of art.

Re:15 years is way too short

[MysteriousPreacher]

As long as the public values and demands a work, the
original creator of the work should be able to continue
benefiting from it.

Why? Copyright is a monopoly granted by the state. We agree to allow this monopoly, on the understanding that the monopoly shall after a reasonable period expire. What you propose us misguided and dangerous.

Re:15 years is way too short

[Optic7]

Because it will remove a major reward for people to create works of art. Consider this scenario: Joe Musician writes a song in 1997 that is pretty cool but never really goes anywhere. 15 years later (2012), the music supervisor on the next Hollywood blockbuster or hugely popular TV show includes it in the soundtrack. They make a billion dollars with the movie or TV show, Joe Musician gets a big fat zero.

I could come up with an endless number of very plausible examples like this. Remember that copyright law protects the little people too, not just the mega media conglomerates. In fact, it often protects the little people from the mega media conglomerates.

I accept that someone could make an argument that what I propose is misguided (in either direction), but how is it dangerous? It's more lenient than the current copyright law in the US, while still protecting the creator.

Re:15 years is way too short

[MysteriousPreacher]

Because it will remove a major reward for people to create works of art. Consider this scenario: Joe Musician writes a song in 1997 that is pretty cool but never really goes anywhere. 15 years later (2012), the music supervisor on the next Hollywood blockbuster or hugely popular TV show includes it in the soundtrack. They make a billion dollars with the movie or TV show, Joe Musician gets a big fat zero.

I could come up with an endless number of very plausible examples like this. Remember that copyright law protects the little people too, not just the mega media conglomerates. In fact, it often protects the little people from the mega media conglomerates.

And I could produce an endless example of innovation prevented or hampered by onerous copyright durations, and examples of creation that came as a result of works lapsing in to the public domain.

I'm not sure how your proposal fixes this. You said that copyright terms should last as long as the public values and demands a work, and while the author lives. Joe's work obviously fell from popularity or was very obscure until the studio picked it up. What happened there? Did Joe lose his copyright during the obscure years, to regain it when the song became popular?

If Joe is still producing music 15 years later, one would hope that in that time he's been able to come up with something else to pay the bills (unless his music is more a hobby). We shouldn't provide these long copyright terms on the off-chance that song/story x could in 15 years time be used commercially. 15 years to me seems a reasonably amount of time for someone to control a work and pursue profit from it. Joe was either remiss in his efforts to profit from his work or the later success of his song is a bit of a freak occurrence.

The idea of copyright only be owned by creators is a nice one, albeit problematic. I should have the right to sell the rights to my work to anyone I chose, which is why I think that copyright terms should simply be fixed periods. I'm presuming when you say that creators should be the only ones to profit, that this would include some scope for licencing works? Otherwise I don't see how publishers could exist, and although many of these companies are vultures (particularly on the music side) they do serve a purpose in the physical world. I would hope though that the move to digital distribution reduces their power.

Maybe 15 is too short for all cases, but certainly I think we agree that the idea of copyright persisting after death is perverse and morbid. History records no instances of creation from beyond the grave.

Re:15 years is way too short

[Optic7]

And I could produce an endless example of innovation prevented or hampered by onerous copyright durations, and examples of creation that came as a result of works lapsing in to the public domain.

Absolutely. But then it would be down to a possible public good vs. denying someone income from their own work. I imagine that if it came down to that choice the courts would side with the individual.

I'm not sure how your proposal fixes this. You said that copyright terms should last as long as the public values and demands a work, and while the author lives. Joe's work obviously fell from popularity or was very obscure until the studio picked it up. What happened there? Did Joe lose his copyright during the obscure years, to regain it when the song became popular?

The scenario was based on the idea of copyrights only lasting 15 years. Anyway, I didn't mean that both conditions had to be true for the copyright to be maintained. What I meant was that as long as Joe was alive, he had a right to any profits made from his creations. I think that a lot of the issues that exist could be resolved by going back to the idea of a shorter initial copyright renewable for a longer time. Something like initial 20 or 30, renewable up to 70 or even 100 (given expected longer lifespans, etc) in steps of 10 years at a time. The creator would have to be the one to make the renewal, so if he dies there are no more renewals.

If Joe is still producing music 15 years later, one would hope that in that time he's been able to come up with something else to pay the bills (unless his music is more a hobby). We shouldn't provide these long copyright terms on the off-chance that song/story x could in 15 years time be used commercially. 15 years to me seems a reasonably amount of time for someone to control a work and pursue profit from it. Joe was either remiss in his efforts to profit from his work or the later success of his song is a bit of a freak occurrence.

Sure, but sometimes art is a very unpredictable business, just look at all the one hit wonders. Also, if you slightly modify my scenario with one of these one hit wonders having their one hit 15 years ago it may make a bit more sense. A lot of old popular songs are revived by covers, movies, TV shows years after original publication.

The idea of copyright only be owned by creators is a nice one, albeit problematic. I should have the right to sell the rights to my work to anyone I chose, which is why I think that copyright terms should simply be fixed periods. I'm presuming when you say that creators should be the only ones to profit, that this would include some scope for licencing works? Otherwise I don't see how publishers could exist, and although many of these companies are vultures (particularly on the music side) they do serve a purpose in the physical world. I would hope though that the move to digital distribution reduces their power.

I agree. Going with a renewable schedule like I mentioned above, the creator could sell the rights to those songs for those specific windows of copyright, after which the copyright would revert to the creator, and he or she would have the option to renew it, and sell the rights for the next window.

Maybe 15 is too short for all cases, but certainly I think we agree that the idea of copyright persisting after death is perverse and morbid. History records no instances of creation from beyond the grave.

Yes, we agree on that, and I think we agree on the general idea that there should be a better balance between the public interest and the interest of the creator of the work when it comes to copyright laws. I think it's mostly a discussion of how to fine tune it to best achieve that balance.

Re:15 years is way too short

[MysteriousPreacher]

Have to nick off - Paddy's day booze to be drunk. Thanks for a very interesting discussion.

Re:15 years is way too short

[Optic7]

No problem, I had to run off as well. Thanks too!

Reason: voting both for and against?

[divec]

Is this just the case where members can sometimes cast a vote both for and against something, effectively cancelling their vote?

This happens all the time in the UK Parliament - the MP just walks through the Aye lobby and then the Nay lobby (or the other way round), then the two votes cancel each other. It's a long-winded way of abstaining. Given how fast MEPs have to vote, maybe they do it when they've made a voting mistake. In which case, you could certainly question the value of such rapid voting, but it wouldn't be an example of fraud.

vote early, vote often

[slew]

"vote early, vote often"*** I hope all those advocates of internet voting are paying attention to this...
*** a quote attributed to John Van Buren, son of the Dutch speaking 8th president of the USA from New Amsterdam, a Lawyer, and a radical castout of the Democratic Party. Long live the Van Buren Boys

Nothing to worry about!

[Sigg3.net]

Don't worry, Hollywood will make snappy green screen remakes with busty actors trying to talk like in the fairy tales, and Cristopher Reeves, looking sternly at people, places AND objects.
Gonna be great!
Make a million dollars!
???
  Profit!

It is a legislative report

[Christian Engstrom]

I took part in the vote as a Member of the JURI Committee in the European Parliament, and I can correct you on a few points. The amendments to a report can change its meaning completely, and the amendment that we lost was a rather important one. Therefore it is wrong to say that it was and "obscure" amendment, and imply that it was not important. The report is a legislative report that will turn into a binding directive and then national law once it is adopted, so it is not the question of a non-binding (or "own initiative") report this time.

Legally

[IBitOBear]

We (The United States of America) "went metric" in the seventies. We just have an infinite grace period for compliance and no penalties for non-compliance. It's super simple now.... chek it out...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_States /doh!

So realy...

[IBitOBear]

About nine iPods are lost a year, or nine-too-few are lost a year, I'm not sure which...

If we made our teenagers more/less dilligent with their stuff the Content Industry would be all square now right?

Re:So realy...

[JWSmythe]

    Aw shit. Now we have a new measurement unit, don't we. A library of congress of books, or an iPod of money or jobs..

Re:What was the count on the decision not to revpt

[Logic and Reason]

I thought it was "He who writes the Checks tips the Balance". I guess that's why they're having trouble adopting it in Europe, since they'd have to spell it "Cheques" instead.

Your government is as corrupt as ours

[rhalstead]

And just as intelligent. Talk about ballot box stuffing and they do it right out in public.

Sounds like Texas/Chicago politics to me.

[warpuck]

A senator from Texas, got elected by dead men. As they say in Chicago "Vote early and often."