Copyright is the protection of the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. When you write that short story, or take that picture, your expression of the idea has certain protections when it is created. Registering the copyright is not a condition for protections of copyright.
Copyright cannot be abandoned unless you explicitly release into public domain. Registration is only to put everyone on notice that you have created something and seek certain advantages from the government if someone takes your copyrighted work. It is easier to prove your case in court if you have registered with USPTO and are seeking to prevent someone from using your work (infringing). Essentially, registering bolsters your claim that the work is your expression and not the opposing parties.
To further elaborate on this point, the Statute of Frauds is used as a defense only. If the contract falls within the statute of frauds, then writing is required. If a contract falls out of the statute of frauds, than a writing is not required in order to have a binding contract.
For a contract to fall within the statute of frauds (in other words, for a contract to require writing) it has to meet one of the following:
1) Marriage contracts 2) Contract must be able to be performed within one year 3) Land (real estate) 4) Sale of goods 5) Executor (of estate) 6) Surety
I have not read a lot of case law regarding email communications as contracts, but I would not doubt that email communication is as valid written communication as the written letter. It would have to meet all the criteria of a contract (offer/acceptace/consideration) but assuming these elements are met, it would make sense that email could be used as evidence of writing or a basis of a contract.
Technically, a contract could be written on a napkin or toilet paper or anything else. It is the content of the contract and the meeting of the minds that is relevant, not the medium by which this information is conveyed.
The only issue left is the formality of the contract, whether the two parties agreed to a promise in writing. This includes a signature of the party to be charged. I would not even bring up old "Kings Bench" law from England to discuss the merits of electronic signatures as valid signatures. We already have a statute that says that electronic signatures are valid: Electronic Signature in Global and National Commerce Act (2000)
The important section 101(a) of E-Sign provides that a signature or contract may not be denied legal effect "solely because it is in electronic form." In turn, an electronic signature is defined as any "electronic sound, symbol, or process, attached to or logically associated with a contract or other record and executed or accepted by a person with the intent to sign the record." [http://www.cfg-lawfirm.com/articles/oneclick.html]
So because there is federal legislation covering interstate commerce in regards to electronic signatures, an American lawyer would not need to drag up any old English common law. Now if we are discussing the exchange of goods, there may be UCC provisions directly applicable to these type of transactions, but I don't know the specifics. After I finish UCC this summer, I may be better informed of this matter:)
Scary stuff. I would prefer google to find this information so that I can type in a simple query and see where my information is being wrongly published then not knowing at all.
I heard that the RIAA is giving away Michael Bolton CD's, so I am sure I can get a discount! Thanks RIAA, now I can save myself $7 on a CD from 10 years ago!
*joking*
I would defintely bring this concern to management, as developers should be the exception to the rule. When I did develop under Windows at a company, I had to install numerous applications of various versions for unit testing in my local dev. environment. I sometimes needed shareware tools that the company didn't have also.
If they made the registry read only, you would not be able to install anything, which is bullshit for a developer to have to go through.
It is bad enough the issues I deal with IT at SUN, but at least I have my Solaris environment and root access under my fingertips. I hate to see the pains developers go through with IT telling them what they can't do and management telling them how to do it.
A feature called Compatability Mode fools older programs into thinking they are working with
Windows 95, 98, ME or 2000 so they do not choke with XP.
We need to educate people.
They think that deleting files and backword compatibilty is innovation!?!?!
They think that because it crashes less its better? Since when was crashing a lot ever acceptable to begin with?!?!?!
People with money and power will always rule over the people without it.
Write to your congressman, write to the president, see how little effect if at all.
The checks and balances used to work in America, but after 200+ years, The Corporations and the Government own us.
Most Americans are clueless in general, like sheep on a farm. They all conform and follow the crowd. The sheep that stand out and rebel against the machine (government + corporations) will just get stomped on.
Everytime we fight against a bill or act proposed in legislation, the communities in the minority (like the technological nerds like ourselves) rally against them since we are the few communities with a clue. Then lets say we win, and the bill or act isn't passed. Is that the last of it? NO FUCKING WAY. They will wait until an opportunity arises and slip their agendas into some other Act or Bill and get it passed. We can not win.
That is the truth.
Americans are like happy sheep, feeding on the grass. They are fat and happy, all following the grazing herd. They are blind to the fact that there is a huge fence keeping them in, and that a week later they will be chopped up for hot dogs.
People don't realize that there is a FEE in
FREE. VA Linux is only using their right
to sell Open Source/Free software (GLP'd)
with proprietary extensions.
This machine just gives more competition to
microsoft windows more then any other. People
must understand Microsofts fighting their way
into the server market, with their
dominance on the PC market. Linux is not a threat
to Sun as much as much as Microsoft is. With Sun
getting into the PC market, it begins to erode
the monopoly Microsoft has on the PC market, giving more leverage to Linux machines in the
meantime. remember that a future version of
Solaris will be GNOME, so Sun is backing the open source community, even Linux. From a conference I just came from, "my enemy's enemy is my friend" (referring to microsoft being linux's enemy).
I recently have found that translating from different languages can have a profound effect on what the original message was. For example of a generic phrase:
%I like to fish in the pond%
was translated from english-> french-> german-> english and it came up with
%self like on the angling inside the pond%
So the entire meaning seems almost lost.
The translation site is:
%http://tranexp.com:2000/InterTran%
any comments on hiding messages by converting them to different languages and back?
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright is the protection of the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. When you write that short story, or take that picture, your expression of the idea has certain protections when it is created. Registering the copyright is not a condition for protections of copyright.
Copyright cannot be abandoned unless you explicitly release into public domain. Registration is only to put everyone on notice that you have created something and seek certain advantages from the government if someone takes your copyrighted work. It is easier to prove your case in court if you have registered with USPTO and are seeking to prevent someone from using your work (infringing). Essentially, registering bolsters your claim that the work is your expression and not the opposing parties.
To further elaborate on this point, the Statute of Frauds is used as a defense only. If the contract falls within the statute of frauds, then writing is required. If a contract falls out of the statute of frauds, than a writing is not required in order to have a binding contract.
l ]
:)
t _bank/fdi-fil-72-2000_e_sign_glob_and_nat_comm_act .pdf
For a contract to fall within the statute of frauds (in other words, for a contract to require writing) it has to meet one of the following:
1) Marriage contracts
2) Contract must be able to be performed within one year
3) Land (real estate)
4) Sale of goods
5) Executor (of estate)
6) Surety
I have not read a lot of case law regarding email communications as contracts, but I would not doubt that email communication is as valid written communication as the written letter. It would have to meet all the criteria of a contract (offer/acceptace/consideration) but assuming these elements are met, it would make sense that email could be used as evidence of writing or a basis of a contract.
Technically, a contract could be written on a napkin or toilet paper or anything else. It is the content of the contract and the meeting of the minds that is relevant, not the medium by which this information is conveyed.
The only issue left is the formality of the contract, whether the two parties agreed to a promise in writing. This includes a signature of the party to be charged. I would not even bring up old "Kings Bench" law from England to discuss the merits of electronic signatures as valid signatures. We already have a statute that says that electronic signatures are valid: Electronic Signature in Global and National Commerce Act (2000)
The important section 101(a) of E-Sign provides that a signature or contract may not be denied legal effect "solely because it is in electronic form." In turn, an electronic signature is defined as any "electronic sound, symbol, or process, attached to or logically associated with a contract or other record and executed or accepted by a person with the intent to sign the record." [http://www.cfg-lawfirm.com/articles/oneclick.htm
So because there is federal legislation covering interstate commerce in regards to electronic signatures, an American lawyer would not need to drag up any old English common law. Now if we are discussing the exchange of goods, there may be UCC provisions directly applicable to these type of transactions, but I don't know the specifics. After I finish UCC this summer, I may be better informed of this matter
Here is a link to the legislation: http://www.ffiec.gov/ffiecinfobase/resources/elec
ummm, yes they do:
http://www.sexbuzz.com/music/13,0005,00.shtml/
This could be good in finding websites that illegally publish this content.
With this search in google:
Mastercard 5000000000000000..5999999999999999
I found this russian site that published American credit card information with expiration dates, names and addresses:
http://kupi-cc.0golf.com/halyva.htm
Scary stuff. I would prefer google to find this information so that I can type in a simple query and see where my information is being wrongly published then not knowing at all.
I heard that the RIAA is giving away Michael Bolton CD's, so I am sure I can get a discount! Thanks RIAA, now I can save myself $7 on a CD from 10 years ago!
true dat
*joking*
I would defintely bring this concern to management, as developers should be the exception to the rule. When I did develop under Windows at a company, I had to install numerous applications of various versions for unit testing in my local dev. environment. I sometimes needed shareware tools that the company didn't have also.
If they made the registry read only, you would not be able to install anything, which is bullshit for a developer to have to go through.
It is bad enough the issues I deal with IT at SUN, but at least I have my Solaris environment and root access under my fingertips. I hate to see the pains developers go through with IT telling them what they can't do and management telling them how to do it.
A feature called Compatability Mode fools older programs into thinking they are working with Windows 95, 98, ME or 2000 so they do not choke with XP.
We need to educate people. They think that deleting files and backword compatibilty is innovation!?!?! They think that because it crashes less its better? Since when was crashing a lot ever acceptable to begin with?!?!?!
We do not have a fucking democracy people.
People with money and power will always rule over the people without it.
Write to your congressman, write to the president, see how little effect if at all.
The checks and balances used to work in America, but after 200+ years, The Corporations and the Government own us.
Most Americans are clueless in general, like sheep on a farm. They all conform and follow the crowd. The sheep that stand out and rebel against the machine (government + corporations) will just get stomped on.
Everytime we fight against a bill or act proposed in legislation, the communities in the minority (like the technological nerds like ourselves) rally against them since we are the few communities with a clue. Then lets say we win, and the bill or act isn't passed. Is that the last of it? NO FUCKING WAY. They will wait until an opportunity arises and slip their agendas into some other Act or Bill and get it passed. We can not win.
That is the truth.
Americans are like happy sheep, feeding on the grass. They are fat and happy, all following the grazing herd. They are blind to the fact that there is a huge fence keeping them in, and that a week later they will be chopped up for hot dogs.
People don't realize that there is a FEE in
FREE. VA Linux is only using their right
to sell Open Source/Free software (GLP'd)
with proprietary extensions.
This machine just gives more competition to microsoft windows more then any other. People must understand Microsofts fighting their way into the server market, with their dominance on the PC market. Linux is not a threat to Sun as much as much as Microsoft is. With Sun getting into the PC market, it begins to erode the monopoly Microsoft has on the PC market, giving more leverage to Linux machines in the meantime. remember that a future version of Solaris will be GNOME, so Sun is backing the open source community, even Linux. From a conference I just came from, "my enemy's enemy is my friend" (referring to microsoft being linux's enemy).
I recently have found that translating from different languages can have a profound effect on what the original message was. For example of a generic phrase: %I like to fish in the pond% was translated from english-> french-> german-> english and it came up with %self like on the angling inside the pond% So the entire meaning seems almost lost. The translation site is: %http://tranexp.com:2000/InterTran% any comments on hiding messages by converting them to different languages and back?