It's far more a question of Netops and "too much bandwidth" than anything else (ie, a Slashdotting will be more than enough to bring me over the 3% total bandwidth warning level and the 5% total bandwidth cutoff - I'm not sure of the total bandwidth available, but I'm pretty sure Slashdot can exceed it). And besides, a top-of-the-line desktop never would be able to serve everyone during a Slashdotting. (Although it should in theory be able to give some people access.)
It should be noted that I disagree with the answer, primarily with this:
I could try asking permission, but do you want to wait 6 hours for a cool breaking story while we wait for permission to link someone?
You'd better ask for permission! I've got webpages (that currently won't interest/.ers, thank goodness) hosted on personal boxes - there's no way they could hold up to the load of a good Slashdotting. If I ever got Slashdotted, I'd lose Internet access! (Because taking up massive amounts of bandwidth allows WPI's netops to kill your account, no questions asked.) If the site is a personal site, it seems irresponsible for Taco to just allow hundreds of thousands of hits to flow in without at least warning the poor sucker. So my answer is "yes" to that question - I'd love to wait 6 hours so that I can actually see the linked article instead of "No route to host" or "Connection timed out" or "Server refused connection."
What would make a more interesting screen shot is a shot of the various seg fault messages on the OSes - whatever OS9 calls 'em, whatever OSX is going to say, Linux's "Segmentation fault (core dumped)" and Windows "General Protection Fault" after attempting to view a Java/JavaScript/CSS intensive site in each of the browsers...
(I find Netscape lasts longer with JavaScript/Java turned off - and these were it's selling points, back in the day...)
Actually, my cellphone does operate full duplex. Although it seems to be actually inserted by the switching equipment back into the incoming audio stream (ie, the tower itself sends back the audio I've said mixed with the audio that the other person said). I'm guessing this because at times, what I said gets repeated to me after a few hundred millisecond delay (once, it was actually about a second between what I said was repeated to me - I don't know if this effected the other end).
It should also be mentioned that original phone design didn't operate in full duplex mode - what you said was sent to the other end and not put in your ear. Result: people shouted on phones until newer phones added some wires so that what you said was played back in your ear. Result of that: people stopped shouting into phones... I guess history is repeating itself.
Re:Laissez-Faire under Benevolent Dictatorship
on
Carl Kadie Responds
·
· Score: 1
Where else can a club make money using WPI resources to host an FPS shooter tournament[If you're in the Boston or Greater Worcester area, drop me an e-mail for details]?
You'd better be referring to Crossfire, and I use the same nick in relation to that as I do on/., but without the underscores...
If you aren't referring to Crossfire, you should be!
I should probably point out that I've never run into problems with the CCC (and I'd like to keep it that way) but I still don't like the power that they've taken for themselves in that AUP. It's overly broad.
Anyone else realize how rediculous the WPI Residential AUP is? Some choice quotes and then my comments on at the end. (Moderators who think this is offtopic didn't read the interview, since the WPI Residential AUP is linked by the interviewee.)
Examples of each level of offense are given. Certainly, this list cannot completely list all violations; it can only show the areas into which violations might fall and attempts to offer guidelines about which action might fit into the area. CCC is the arbiter of the severity of the violation. ... Minor offense: ... Storage of copyright materials, only if it appears to have been possible that someone else might have stored the materials on the system (e.g. due to careless security of the system). ... Major offense: ... Storage of copyright materials, where it appears that the individual stored the material by their own hand. The materials might not have been absolutely known to have been copyright violations. ... Termination offense: ... Storage of copyright materials, where it appears that the individual stored the material by their own hand, where the copyright was obvious. Software packages are obvious violations, since anyone who ever saw a software distribution would be aware that the materials were not to be distributed. ...
Pictures or sounds would only fall under major offenses, since they are not usually so definitively labeled. If we can determine that the picture came from a magazine or the sounds came from a CD, that would be a termination offense, since those media would be labelled as copyrighted sources.
The result will be termination of connectivity; note that networking fees are not refundable. An application for connectivity will not be accepted within a calendar year of the termination.
You are not allowed to exercise fair use rights to copyrighted material, exercising these rights is a termination offense! If you rip a CD that you own willfully to your own computer you are violating the WPI terms! Notice it never says the files have to be publically accessable, just that the files are stored on your computer! It also never states that you may store copyrighted files that you are legally entitled to - any copyrighted file counts!
Storing copyrighted files period is a major offense?!? Damnit, I suppose I'll have to delete my Windows install, my Linux install, my Office install, my Netscape install,... all copyrighted, all legally installed! Not to mention the many.c and.pl files that I've written that are Copyrighted - by me. In fact, if any copyrighted file shows up on your machine, you can be disconnected - for the entire year - without hope of arbitration, and without getting the $250/$500 (10Mb/s or 100Mb/s connection) fee back. This would seem to give them way over-reaching power to disconnect anyone, since most systems don't like running without the copyrighted BIOS software... (Since it never specifies persistant storage, it would appear playing a DVD or a CD via computer also counts!)
If that weren't enough, the prefix says that this list does not list all violation! Not only that, but they are sole judge and jury as to the severity of the offense. I better not piss off anyone in the CCC!
What's even more annoying is that the residential policy is not mentioned on the network signup form or any of the ResNet pages!
If companies like Nintendo/Sega/Sony took this kind of view of the international market when they were developing software and only made their games work well in Japan
If by "work well" you mean "only release in" then they already do this... (Plus console makers are bad examples since most consoles are, minus some region encoding (most noticably, NTSC as opposed to PAL), identical in the US and Japan. Although with the advent of online gaming in consoles, this may change...)
The US never got to see Final Fantasy 2, 3, or 5... Plus there are some games that make it to Europe and Japan but never here (I'm pretty sure Terrangima was released in Japan and Europe - but never the US)...
And you know something? People do complain about it. Which I guess isn't surprising at all.
Um, I went there. His web site is sort of... sparse on any details. It's rather vague. He basically says Slashdot and Linux three times in three ways, contains links to pictures, MP3s he's writing, gives some music info, says he's on SlashNET, and then says that security is good.
That still gives no idea what he actually does at Slashdot or Everything2, what projects he's working on (he says he "hacks" - hacks on what?). Other than asking him more questions about "what on earth do you do" I really can't come up with anything more based off that.
His home page doesn't even have his real name on it! It has his last name, but that's it - and that's only in the page title!
I dunno - I suppose maybe the interview was really too vague (as in, ask Pater about...? Slashdot? Himself? Whatever?)
Since NT3.51 and Win95OSR2, Windows has had OpenGL support with every OS. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that they were simply using OpenGL. Quake3 was written for OpenGL. Just because DirectX is on Windows doesn't mean they used it.
You have to have had a user account for ~6 months to a year. I'm pretty sure I was allowed to metamoderate after six months of being a member, but it may have been longer. It's not tied to karma.
(Maybe I should e-mail this... I wonder if Hemos checks replies?)
In the future, you might want to give us a clue of what CowboyNeal does do when asking for questions. A brief bio or something (like what he works on, his likes/dislikes, projects, whatever). I really know nothing about him (or much of the/. crew, really), and therefore couldn't think of any questions to ask him. Maybe if we knew more about him and what he does the questions would have been more in line with what he does - but since I really have no idea exactly what he does (other than "admins the site" which is overly vague - what does running Slashdot entail?[1]), I really have nothing to ask him.
Except maybe that he pronounce his name with a hard A instead of with a soft A since it sounds too much like my last name, "Potter." (And no, I'm not interested in changing my first name to "Harry.")
[1] Maybe I did have a question to ask... too bad I didn't think of it at the time of the interview!
I dunno - I heard some guy talk about the history of UNIX, and he made a big deal about how the lawsuit scared developers away from BSD. So my facts are based on what he said, and may be wrong... oh well.
While I read this, the highest moderated comment says "Slashdot editors don't post" or something like that... Apparently they do read comments and occasionally post...
You mean these penguin statues? They're shown on the main page of the Linux Jewllery site. These also show off the variety of metals, so those interested in a Beastie might wanna check them out also.
Those familiar with Apache's history will remember it's called Apache because it was a set of patches to the NCSA's implementation - APatchy Web Server. So no, it's not something innovated either. UNIX was created at AT&T, and for a while back around the end of the eighties it looked like BSD would be ruled an illegal clone of it. That's what moved people off 386BSD and onto Linux, as it turns out. So no innovation there.
Lay off the man. I completely understand his posistion on this - and if I'm doing an article on him, you'd bet I'd make the difference clear.
Seriously, his point is that most Linux systems are mostly based on the GNU tools and he feels a little cheated that most people concentrate on the kernel. Yes, the world mostly says "Linux" but his life's work is the GNU project and it makes sense for him to request that people refer to systems where most of the user-level software is from the GNU project as GNU/Linux systems.
While I might not be inclined to honor his request simply because GNU/Linux is a bit of a mouthful and, as you pointed out, most people just say "Linux" I don't think there's anything wrong with him requesting that people call what really are GNU/Linux systems "GNU/Linux." He's made an enormous contribution to Free/Open software whether you'll give him credit or not. Almost all the software I use on a daily basis is either directly from the GNU project or licenced under the GPL. He's done a lot for the Linux community and he wants to be recognized. So let him ask that he be recognized, and don't complain about his request. You don't have to honor it, but at least understand it.
I hate internet explorer - I click "insightful", scroll down to the bottom, click "moderate," and it comes out "redundant." Since/. stores moderations, it'd be nice to be able to change them...
I remember that app - OptOut. Never had it crash on me, though. It should be noted, however, that even though it may have been written in assembly, most of it wasn't in assembly - since it's (dynamically) linked to your standard Windows libraries (KERNEL32.DLL, GDI32.DLL, ADVAPI32.DLL, COMCTL32.DLL, and SHELL32.DLL to be exact). The core of the program may have been assembly, but most of what it actually did was through Win32 library calls, most of which are written in C (I believe).
The simple fact is, as you allude to, writing something in 100% assembly is, for the most part, foolish - you cut down on stability and development time for a small gain in speed.
(It's a lot easier to muck things up in assembly... like the time my "print random colored characters" assembly homework program became a "change the screen to random modes" because I set some value wrong - forget which one. It was pretty funny to watch though... looked weird, screen blinking with all this weird garabage all over it. Thankfully the "quit on keypress" portion worked...)
Personally, I don't believe OptOut would be any faster than a similar program written in C. In fact, I'd bet that the C program would be more stable, and more useful, since it would be much more easy to extend in new ways. (Especially for finding new spyware, which is what OptOut was designed for.)
Add an article that congress cannot extend copyright duration faster than the a certain passage of time.
And who has the power to do that?
Congress.
And who will find themselves being lobbied not to pass such an article?
Congress.
So we're really right back at the start...
What we really need to do is to lobby Congress ourselves to make them see the issue our way. Next time a stupid copyright bill comes down, we need to get all the American Slashdotters to decend on Congress and lobby for our rights. It'll be fun:)
1. A 'billion million years' is effectively permanent...
Yeah, but once you're getting to "author's life + x years"... Keep in mind, they were hoping to reduce copyright to author's life + 50 years/75 years (author/work for hire). Saying that the other 20 years changes it from being limited to being permanent is rather foolish.
2. [paraphrase: the extension does not help to promote the arts and sciences]
The problem with this is that it's really open for interpretation - you interpret the extension as being detrimental to progress (I agree). The judges did not. (Well, minus the dissenting opinion.) Proving this is something that's hard to do - most scientists know that almost all progress is based off of previous work. The same is true, in a way, for copyright. Here's where to get's fun - copyright covers artistic creations, not scientific works. (In other words, the copyrighted article describing how a frozit works is protected from copying, but the idea about frozit's is protected by the patent. The patent expires first, but I can't use the original article verbatum - I can write my own.)
So - here's the problem. I can't really think of any proof that extended copyright harms the progress of science and the useful arts. Application of it might (the screwing over of artists via work-for-hire schemes, remember the extra 25 years) - but I'm hard-pressed to prove that copyright law as it stands really hurts the progress of the arts and sciences.
I believe that it does - but I can't really come up with any iron-tight proof, other to say I feel that way. That's why I agree with the ruling.
Simple difference: ereferee is 14% longer than referee. So say they are 14% different.
Actually, I'm being unfair. There's another reason - there are four `e's in "referee" - there are five in "ereferee." The difference is much less because of both the length and the actual difference in characters, as well as the makeup of the words in characters.
The E doesn't really set anything apart, it's right next to the `r' key, and is likely to be a common type for referee. Most people aren't used to thinking in terms of characters. They think words. The E is liable to confuse most people. Where as "ebay" advertised with the E being prominant, the e in ereferee doesn't really stick out. (It looks like a typo, really.)
From the article writeup: ...that permanent copyright is an unwarranted extension of Congress' powers.
Well, duh, we all know that. And so do the judges. The problem is, copyright hasn't been extended to be permanent yet!
Even if, for all intents and purposes, it is far too long, it's still not permanent! And this is the problem. I personally agree that the current span of copyright is far too long. However, my opinions mean nothing legally. Face it, if they decided that copyright lasted a billion million years or whatever, it's still "limited."
When I first read of this case, my reaction was "tell me when they lose" because none of their arguments really hold water in my not-so-legally-binding opinion. This cannot be fought in court. This battle must be fought with the legislature. Write your congress-critter. Write editorials to your paper. Get people informed!
Trying to get this law overturned in the courts is the wrong way to go about it. Don't bug the judges about this - bug Congress. They write the laws. Fixing what the problems in copyright has to go through Congress. They extended copyright, they have the power to reduce it. Make it an issue. But don't fight this in the courts - it's well within Congress's right to make these kind of laws. It's a delegated power. So take the issue where it belongs - to the law makers.
Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD has SMP support and I'm pretty sure various BSDs have had SMP support on various architectures other than the Alpha.
It's far more a question of Netops and "too much bandwidth" than anything else (ie, a Slashdotting will be more than enough to bring me over the 3% total bandwidth warning level and the 5% total bandwidth cutoff - I'm not sure of the total bandwidth available, but I'm pretty sure Slashdot can exceed it). And besides, a top-of-the-line desktop never would be able to serve everyone during a Slashdotting. (Although it should in theory be able to give some people access.)
It should be noted that I disagree with the answer, primarily with this:
You'd better ask for permission! I've got webpages (that currently won't interest /.ers, thank goodness) hosted on personal boxes - there's no way they could hold up to the load of a good Slashdotting. If I ever got Slashdotted, I'd lose Internet access! (Because taking up massive amounts of bandwidth allows WPI's netops to kill your account, no questions asked.) If the site is a personal site, it seems irresponsible for Taco to just allow hundreds of thousands of hits to flow in without at least warning the poor sucker. So my answer is "yes" to that question - I'd love to wait 6 hours so that I can actually see the linked article instead of "No route to host" or "Connection timed out" or "Server refused connection."
You mean GTK+ on Win32 like offered here which is linked from the GTK+ webpage?
(I find Netscape lasts longer with JavaScript/Java turned off - and these were it's selling points, back in the day...)
e) Hemos
I think that would be more appropriate, seeing as Hemos basically ran Slashdot's advertising before it was bought by Andover.net.
It should also be mentioned that original phone design didn't operate in full duplex mode - what you said was sent to the other end and not put in your ear. Result: people shouted on phones until newer phones added some wires so that what you said was played back in your ear. Result of that: people stopped shouting into phones... I guess history is repeating itself.
You'd better be referring to Crossfire, and I use the same nick in relation to that as I do on /., but without the underscores...
If you aren't referring to Crossfire, you should be!
I should probably point out that I've never run into problems with the CCC (and I'd like to keep it that way) but I still don't like the power that they've taken for themselves in that AUP. It's overly broad.
Examples of each level of offense are given. Certainly, this list cannot completely list all violations; it can only show the areas into which violations might fall and attempts to offer guidelines about which action might fit into the area. CCC is the arbiter of the severity of the violation.
...
Minor offense:
...
Storage of copyright materials, only if it appears to have been possible that someone else might have stored the materials on the system (e.g. due to careless security of the system).
...
Major offense:
...
Storage of copyright materials, where it appears that the individual stored the material by their own hand. The materials might not have been absolutely known to have been copyright violations.
...
Termination offense:
...
Storage of copyright materials, where it appears that the individual stored the material by their own hand, where the copyright was obvious. Software packages are obvious violations, since anyone who ever saw a software distribution would be aware that the materials were not to be distributed.
...
Pictures or sounds would only fall under major offenses, since they are not usually so definitively labeled. If we can determine that the picture came from a magazine or the sounds came from a CD, that would be a termination offense, since those media would be labelled as copyrighted sources.
The result will be termination of connectivity; note that networking fees are not refundable. An application for connectivity will not be accepted within a calendar year of the termination.
You are not allowed to exercise fair use rights to copyrighted material, exercising these rights is a termination offense! If you rip a CD that you own willfully to your own computer you are violating the WPI terms! Notice it never says the files have to be publically accessable, just that the files are stored on your computer! It also never states that you may store copyrighted files that you are legally entitled to - any copyrighted file counts!
Storing copyrighted files period is a major offense?!? Damnit, I suppose I'll have to delete my Windows install, my Linux install, my Office install, my Netscape install, ... all copyrighted, all legally installed! Not to mention the many .c and .pl files that I've written that are Copyrighted - by me. In fact, if any copyrighted file shows up on your machine, you can be disconnected - for the entire year - without hope of arbitration, and without getting the $250/$500 (10Mb/s or 100Mb/s connection) fee back. This would seem to give them way over-reaching power to disconnect anyone, since most systems don't like running without the copyrighted BIOS software... (Since it never specifies persistant storage, it would appear playing a DVD or a CD via computer also counts!)
If that weren't enough, the prefix says that this list does not list all violation! Not only that, but they are sole judge and jury as to the severity of the offense. I better not piss off anyone in the CCC!
What's even more annoying is that the residential policy is not mentioned on the network signup form or any of the ResNet pages!
If by "work well" you mean "only release in" then they already do this... (Plus console makers are bad examples since most consoles are, minus some region encoding (most noticably, NTSC as opposed to PAL), identical in the US and Japan. Although with the advent of online gaming in consoles, this may change...)
The US never got to see Final Fantasy 2, 3, or 5... Plus there are some games that make it to Europe and Japan but never here (I'm pretty sure Terrangima was released in Japan and Europe - but never the US)...
And you know something? People do complain about it. Which I guess isn't surprising at all.
That still gives no idea what he actually does at Slashdot or Everything2, what projects he's working on (he says he "hacks" - hacks on what?). Other than asking him more questions about "what on earth do you do" I really can't come up with anything more based off that.
His home page doesn't even have his real name on it! It has his last name, but that's it - and that's only in the page title!
I dunno - I suppose maybe the interview was really too vague (as in, ask Pater about ...? Slashdot? Himself? Whatever?)
Since NT3.51 and Win95OSR2, Windows has had OpenGL support with every OS. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that they were simply using OpenGL. Quake3 was written for OpenGL. Just because DirectX is on Windows doesn't mean they used it.
You have to have had a user account for ~6 months to a year. I'm pretty sure I was allowed to metamoderate after six months of being a member, but it may have been longer. It's not tied to karma.
In the future, you might want to give us a clue of what CowboyNeal does do when asking for questions. A brief bio or something (like what he works on, his likes/dislikes, projects, whatever). I really know nothing about him (or much of the /. crew, really), and therefore couldn't think of any questions to ask him. Maybe if we knew more about him and what he does the questions would have been more in line with what he does - but since I really have no idea exactly what he does (other than "admins the site" which is overly vague - what does running Slashdot entail?[1]), I really have nothing to ask him.
Except maybe that he pronounce his name with a hard A instead of with a soft A since it sounds too much like my last name, "Potter." (And no, I'm not interested in changing my first name to "Harry.")
[1] Maybe I did have a question to ask... too bad I didn't think of it at the time of the interview!
I dunno - I heard some guy talk about the history of UNIX, and he made a big deal about how the lawsuit scared developers away from BSD. So my facts are based on what he said, and may be wrong... oh well.
While I read this, the highest moderated comment says "Slashdot editors don't post" or something like that... Apparently they do read comments and occasionally post...
You mean these penguin statues? They're shown on the main page of the Linux Jewllery site. These also show off the variety of metals, so those interested in a Beastie might wanna check them out also.
Those familiar with Apache's history will remember it's called Apache because it was a set of patches to the NCSA's implementation - A Patchy Web Server. So no, it's not something innovated either. UNIX was created at AT&T, and for a while back around the end of the eighties it looked like BSD would be ruled an illegal clone of it. That's what moved people off 386BSD and onto Linux, as it turns out. So no innovation there.
Seriously, his point is that most Linux systems are mostly based on the GNU tools and he feels a little cheated that most people concentrate on the kernel. Yes, the world mostly says "Linux" but his life's work is the GNU project and it makes sense for him to request that people refer to systems where most of the user-level software is from the GNU project as GNU/Linux systems.
While I might not be inclined to honor his request simply because GNU/Linux is a bit of a mouthful and, as you pointed out, most people just say "Linux" I don't think there's anything wrong with him requesting that people call what really are GNU/Linux systems "GNU/Linux." He's made an enormous contribution to Free/Open software whether you'll give him credit or not. Almost all the software I use on a daily basis is either directly from the GNU project or licenced under the GPL. He's done a lot for the Linux community and he wants to be recognized. So let him ask that he be recognized, and don't complain about his request. You don't have to honor it, but at least understand it.
Sorry.
The simple fact is, as you allude to, writing something in 100% assembly is, for the most part, foolish - you cut down on stability and development time for a small gain in speed.
(It's a lot easier to muck things up in assembly... like the time my "print random colored characters" assembly homework program became a "change the screen to random modes" because I set some value wrong - forget which one. It was pretty funny to watch though... looked weird, screen blinking with all this weird garabage all over it. Thankfully the "quit on keypress" portion worked...)
Personally, I don't believe OptOut would be any faster than a similar program written in C. In fact, I'd bet that the C program would be more stable, and more useful, since it would be much more easy to extend in new ways. (Especially for finding new spyware, which is what OptOut was designed for.)
And who has the power to do that?
Congress.
And who will find themselves being lobbied not to pass such an article?
Congress.
So we're really right back at the start...
What we really need to do is to lobby Congress ourselves to make them see the issue our way. Next time a stupid copyright bill comes down, we need to get all the American Slashdotters to decend on Congress and lobby for our rights. It'll be fun :)
Yeah, but once you're getting to "author's life + x years"... Keep in mind, they were hoping to reduce copyright to author's life + 50 years/75 years (author/work for hire). Saying that the other 20 years changes it from being limited to being permanent is rather foolish.
2. [paraphrase: the extension does not help to promote the arts and sciences]
The problem with this is that it's really open for interpretation - you interpret the extension as being detrimental to progress (I agree). The judges did not. (Well, minus the dissenting opinion.) Proving this is something that's hard to do - most scientists know that almost all progress is based off of previous work. The same is true, in a way, for copyright. Here's where to get's fun - copyright covers artistic creations, not scientific works. (In other words, the copyrighted article describing how a frozit works is protected from copying, but the idea about frozit's is protected by the patent. The patent expires first, but I can't use the original article verbatum - I can write my own.)
So - here's the problem. I can't really think of any proof that extended copyright harms the progress of science and the useful arts. Application of it might (the screwing over of artists via work-for-hire schemes, remember the extra 25 years) - but I'm hard-pressed to prove that copyright law as it stands really hurts the progress of the arts and sciences.
I believe that it does - but I can't really come up with any iron-tight proof, other to say I feel that way. That's why I agree with the ruling.
bay - three characters.
Simple difference: ebay is 33% longer than bay. So say they are 33% different.
referee - seven characters
ereferee - eight characters
Simple difference: ereferee is 14% longer than referee. So say they are 14% different.
Actually, I'm being unfair. There's another reason - there are four `e's in "referee" - there are five in "ereferee." The difference is much less because of both the length and the actual difference in characters, as well as the makeup of the words in characters.
The E doesn't really set anything apart, it's right next to the `r' key, and is likely to be a common type for referee. Most people aren't used to thinking in terms of characters. They think words. The E is liable to confuse most people. Where as "ebay" advertised with the E being prominant, the e in ereferee doesn't really stick out. (It looks like a typo, really.)
Well, duh, we all know that. And so do the judges. The problem is, copyright hasn't been extended to be permanent yet!
Even if, for all intents and purposes, it is far too long, it's still not permanent! And this is the problem. I personally agree that the current span of copyright is far too long. However, my opinions mean nothing legally. Face it, if they decided that copyright lasted a billion million years or whatever, it's still "limited."
When I first read of this case, my reaction was "tell me when they lose" because none of their arguments really hold water in my not-so-legally-binding opinion. This cannot be fought in court. This battle must be fought with the legislature. Write your congress-critter. Write editorials to your paper. Get people informed!
Trying to get this law overturned in the courts is the wrong way to go about it. Don't bug the judges about this - bug Congress. They write the laws. Fixing what the problems in copyright has to go through Congress. They extended copyright, they have the power to reduce it. Make it an issue. But don't fight this in the courts - it's well within Congress's right to make these kind of laws. It's a delegated power. So take the issue where it belongs - to the law makers.