Yes, there are. The NYS thruway has added internet kiosks at good number of thier rest stops along I-90. I even saw one of the IdleAir stations on the thruway too. Interesting stuff there.
Thinking along those lines, if a trucker is on-line for too long during their mandatory breaks, they're more likely to fall asleep while driving.
A similar event happened in Niagara Falls when a bus driver on a casino junket spent his overnight in the casino instead of sleeping. He fell asleep at the wheel and killed some of the passengers on the bus.
What they're saying is that the amount of money saved from software licenses would be greater than the amount of money required to hire additional developers to support their development/deployment efforts.
"Separation of the [democracy and capitalism] also depends on an unspoken deal, a nonaggression pact, between democracy's political majority and capitalism's affluent minority. The majority acknowledge that capitalism benefits all of us, even if some benefit a lot more than others. The majority also take comfort in the belief that everyone has at least a shot at scoring big. The affluent minority, meanwhile, acknowledge that their good fortune is at least in part the luck of the draw. They recognize that domestic tranquility, protection from foreign enemies, and other government functions are worth more to people with more at stake. And they retain a tiny yet prudent fear of what beast might be awakened if the fortunate folks get too greedy about protecting and enlarging their good fortune."
Deaf people. One of my hard-of-hearing friends has one of the original sidekicks, and she loves it. The phone can be turned up loud enough that it's usable for her. The IM'ing is great too... only problem is that we went out and she ignored me while typing away to other friends on it.:-p
But, the IM'ing capability is good, especially when combined with the web browser.
As an alternative, Wyndtell offers similar services, but, heck, you can get the sidekick from them too.
The barrier to "project gutenburg" right now is that with the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (SBCTEA), NOTHING NEW is passing into the public domain for 20 YEARS.
If the SBCTEA weren't retroactive, Eldred, Lessig, et. al. wouldn't have had any grounds to bring Eldred v. Ashcroft to the Supreme Court.
Copyright is a social contract. When you publish something, you know how long the copyright term is going to be when you publish it (granted, this law changes it a bit.) You know when it's going to expire. That's the bargain you make.
No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright... You do it by requiring a proactive registration system?
Still isn't. 50 years is protected by the Berne Convention, and we can't overrule that with a law.
Hence, the 50 year, no action timeframe. As we currently have under law.
You'll be able to register copyrights at any time up to the end of that 50 years. (Of course, they'll be retroactive to the date of first publication or registration, whichever comes first.)
Then, you've got a 6 month grace period to pay the extension on the copyright when the 50 years is up.
Not registered with the copyright office? 50 years from the date of publication.
Registered with the copyright office? Within 50 years? It's under copyright.
After 50 years? Somebody's paying it? Should be easy to track down who.
Nobody's paying it? Public domain. Do as you please.
So what if third parties, seeing that a potentially competing work might enter the public domain, decides to renew a copyright?
RTFA. You get 50 years. And a 6 month grace period. Then a 6 month grace period to renew. That's it. Finitio. Public domain. The genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in.
Sometimes a work becomes known only BECAUSE it's out of copyright
Which would be the movie "It's a Wonderful Life"
The movie itself is out of copyright. The soundtrack and music in the movie are not though. It wasn't a popular movie when it was released, only years later when a network was trying to find something to fill in a christmas time time-slot did it gain popularity again.
That's not what Eldred and Lessig's proposal does.
If you RTFA, you'd see "The Act would require copyright owners to pay a small fee to maintain their copyright on any published United States work 50 years after the date of first publication, and every five years afterwards for the duration of the copyright term."
You don't have to register it. The Berne Convention gives you those rights immideatley on publication.
Current case law limits damanges that can be awarded for copyright violations on unregistered works though.
If you don't care enough about your copyright to bother registering it within 50 years and then paying a nominal fee every 5 years thereafter for the remaining term of the copyright, then I don't see why you should have it anymore.
Exactly. If Author A dies without heirs, And Meanie B wants to prevent me from using Author A's works, any court will laugh Meanie B out of the courtroom because they have no standing to bring a lawsuit.
If you RTFA, the extension only goes for the duration of the copyright term.
It would be 50 years + 40 years as of present. (if we were to implement it corporation style.) Hell, I'd even say 50 + 40 renewable years for individuals.
Why not? If you're going to pay now, or pay later, the government would be more than happy to have you pay now. If you know that something is going to be valuable for the next 50 + x years, then pay for those x years + registration fees. If you don't know if it's going to be valuable, then sit on it. you should still be able to register it within 50 years. (of course, that 50 years shouldn't start then, it should go back retroactive to first publication, like current copyright law is).
Note: x will probably be 40 to match current copyright terms for corporations.
It just struck me, I've seen something like this before. It was turned into an HBO "Real Stories" documentary.
A drunk driver killed a girl. In addition to all his other punishments, he was to hand write and mail/deliver check for $1 each week to the parents of the girl he killed.
This was to continue for a set amount of years.
The amount of money was inconsiquential, but it did force the drunk driver to think each week about the life he had taken and the consequences of his actions. Even for just the time that it took to write and mail a check.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there are. The NYS thruway has added internet kiosks at good number of thier rest stops along I-90. I even saw one of the IdleAir stations on the thruway too. Interesting stuff there.
Thinking along those lines, if a trucker is on-line for too long during their mandatory breaks, they're more likely to fall asleep while driving.
A similar event happened in Niagara Falls when a bus driver on a casino junket spent his overnight in the casino instead of sleeping. He fell asleep at the wheel and killed some of the passengers on the bus.
What they're saying is that the amount of money saved from software licenses would be greater than the amount of money required to hire additional developers to support their development/deployment efforts.
Take a read:
"Separation of the [democracy and capitalism] also depends on an unspoken deal, a nonaggression pact, between democracy's political majority and capitalism's affluent minority. The majority acknowledge that capitalism benefits all of us, even if some benefit a lot more than others. The majority also take comfort in the belief that everyone has at least a shot at scoring big. The affluent minority, meanwhile, acknowledge that their good fortune is at least in part the luck of the draw. They recognize that domestic tranquility, protection from foreign enemies, and other government functions are worth more to people with more at stake. And they retain a tiny yet prudent fear of what beast might be awakened if the fortunate folks get too greedy about protecting and enlarging their good fortune."
And here's a promotional song: .WIP it.... .WIP it good...
:-p
Oh, horrible earworms.
$12,000 at RPI... hmmm... Tuition for 2002-3 was reportedly $26,400.
I mean, granted, there's tons of financial aid, grants, and scholarships to figure in, but that's still a ton of money.
You should be more worried about finishing up those remedial english courses than where he was able to get $12,000 from.
"The purpose of a lawsuit is not to win but to harass" - L. Ron Hubbard - Cult Founder
Yeah, and we know what that cult's been up to.
Perhaps he thought "eschewplastic.com" would be good, but didn't have faith in the ability of his fellow RPI students spelling?
Deaf people. One of my hard-of-hearing friends has one of the original sidekicks, and she loves it. The phone can be turned up loud enough that it's usable for her. The IM'ing is great too... only problem is that we went out and she ignored me while typing away to other friends on it. :-p
But, the IM'ing capability is good, especially when combined with the web browser.
As an alternative, Wyndtell offers similar services, but, heck, you can get the sidekick from them too.
That's true. I was thinking of it more from a poor indie singer/songwriter angle.
The amount of money is nominal. We're saying that if you want additional protection of the law, you should have to pay for it.
Hell, thinking of it that way, republicans should be tripping over each other running to get this bill to the floor.
The barrier to "project gutenburg" right now is that with the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (SBCTEA), NOTHING NEW is passing into the public domain for 20 YEARS.
If the SBCTEA weren't retroactive, Eldred, Lessig, et. al. wouldn't have had any grounds to bring Eldred v. Ashcroft to the Supreme Court.
Copyright is a social contract. When you publish something, you know how long the copyright term is going to be when you publish it (granted, this law changes it a bit.) You know when it's going to expire. That's the bargain you make.
You get 50 years free. That's what the Berne Convention gets you. We're saying if you want any more, pay for it.
Copyright is a social contract. If you want to keep something out of the hands of the public, DON'T PUBLISH IT.
No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright ... You do it by requiring a proactive registration system?
Still isn't. 50 years is protected by the Berne Convention, and we can't overrule that with a law.
Hence, the 50 year, no action timeframe. As we currently have under law.
You'll be able to register copyrights at any time up to the end of that 50 years. (Of course, they'll be retroactive to the date of first publication or registration, whichever comes first.)
Then, you've got a 6 month grace period to pay the extension on the copyright when the 50 years is up.
maybe some large tax-deductions for placing works in the public-domain.
Consider this example:
Ajhkajhdfakjdflajsdfasdfjasldf. Copyright 2003. me.
I release that sentence into the public domain.
*cha ching!* tax break!
Ajhkajhdfakjdflajsdfasdfasgersldf. Copyright 2003. me.
I release that sentence into the public domain.
*cha ching!* another tax break!
Ooooh! There goes all my tax liability. All for one hour's worth of creation.
Not going to work, I'm afraid.
That's what the courts are for.
Not registered with the copyright office? 50 years from the date of publication.
Registered with the copyright office? Within 50 years? It's under copyright.
After 50 years? Somebody's paying it? Should be easy to track down who.
Nobody's paying it? Public domain. Do as you please.
So what if third parties, seeing that a potentially competing work might enter the public domain, decides to renew a copyright?
RTFA. You get 50 years. And a 6 month grace period. Then a 6 month grace period to renew. That's it. Finitio. Public domain. The genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in.
No accidental "gotcha's".
Sometimes a work becomes known only BECAUSE it's out of copyright
Which would be the movie "It's a Wonderful Life"
The movie itself is out of copyright. The soundtrack and music in the movie are not though. It wasn't a popular movie when it was released, only years later when a network was trying to find something to fill in a christmas time time-slot did it gain popularity again.
That's not what Eldred and Lessig's proposal does.
If you RTFA, you'd see "The Act would require copyright owners to pay a small fee to maintain their copyright on any published United States work 50 years after the date of first publication, and every five years afterwards for the duration of the copyright term. "
Emphasis mine.
You don't have to register it. The Berne Convention gives you those rights immideatley on publication.
Current case law limits damanges that can be awarded for copyright violations on unregistered works though.
If you don't care enough about your copyright to bother registering it within 50 years and then paying a nominal fee every 5 years thereafter for the remaining term of the copyright, then I don't see why you should have it anymore.
Exactly. If Author A dies without heirs, And Meanie B wants to prevent me from using Author A's works, any court will laugh Meanie B out of the courtroom because they have no standing to bring a lawsuit.
If you RTFA, the extension only goes for the duration of the copyright term.
It would be 50 years + 40 years as of present. (if we were to implement it corporation style.) Hell, I'd even say 50 + 40 renewable years for individuals.
Why not? If you're going to pay now, or pay later, the government would be more than happy to have you pay now. If you know that something is going to be valuable for the next 50 + x years, then pay for those x years + registration fees. If you don't know if it's going to be valuable, then sit on it. you should still be able to register it within 50 years. (of course, that 50 years shouldn't start then, it should go back retroactive to first publication, like current copyright law is).
Note: x will probably be 40 to match current copyright terms for corporations.
It just struck me, I've seen something like this before. It was turned into an HBO "Real Stories" documentary.
A drunk driver killed a girl. In addition to all his other punishments, he was to hand write and mail/deliver check for $1 each week to the parents of the girl he killed.
This was to continue for a set amount of years.
The amount of money was inconsiquential, but it did force the drunk driver to think each week about the life he had taken and the consequences of his actions. Even for just the time that it took to write and mail a check.
When does a "work" die? When does a corporation "die"?
We, as a society, cannot function if every idea we create is locked away forever.