The issue seems fairly obvious to solve, to me: You, as the copyright holder, . . . must send them a registered letter or similar once a year for your work to be declared not orphaned.
Something much like your solution was used in the U.S. for 186 years. From 1790 to 1976, holders of U.S. copyrights were required to send a letter renewing their rights at the half-way point in the term. If they failed to do so, their copyright expired. In 1976, that solution was deemed too onerous, too prone to error, too disrespectful of inalienable "moral rights", or just plain too unprofitable, and was replaced with automatic copyrights that don't require registration and last forever.* It wasn't a bad solution, but the powers that be will never return to it.
The proposal mentioned by TFA to tax some video games based on violent content is not coming from anyone in elected office. It is part of a package that includes abolishing all private property taxes, abolishing the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, and applying a $10,000 tax on any abortion.
It's fun reading if you can get past the spelling and grammar errors.
Before everyone loses their minds, note that squatting will not be a viable business model with these domains. From TFA:
The currently proposed application fee is $185,000, says Levins, plus an annual "continuance" fee of $25,000. If more than one company wants a suffix, there could be a bidding war.
Next question: was it deliberate? Was the misconduct deliberately carried out at the behest of Republican appointees in the DOJ to ensure that Stevens would not serve time?
More interesting is the contrast between that USA map and the one on page 3 of the report summary. Differences include more areas off the coasts mapped (e.g., near California/Oregon) and data for 50m above the surface, as well as extra-superb category names.
Well, TFA is just about incoherent as to what percentage of whose demand when could be produced from wind turbines where. This article is a great deal clearer about its claims.
It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
No, what it says is that Sec Com could demand any information from any person anywhere in U.S. jurisdiction, so long as that information somehow "concerns" such networks.
OK, so NASA is unwilling to name the node after a living entertainer who regularly voices polarizing opinions. However, they want to save face and not appear to override the vote. Here's a solution: double down.
Allow Stephen Colbert (the character) to hold a second vote to select a Truthy, flag-waving name for the station. Stephen Colbert (the character) could have no end of fun with this. By closely controlling options in the second vote, NASA and Colbert (the person) could ensure a name that NASA could accept.
The floor is now open for suggestions (subject to host approval)!
Slashdot Mirror
Note that litigation costs scale badly.
Beyond a certain threshold, it is cheaper to legislate first.
The issue seems fairly obvious to solve, to me: You, as the copyright holder, . . . must send them a registered letter or similar once a year for your work to be declared not orphaned.
Something much like your solution was used in the U.S. for 186 years. From 1790 to 1976, holders of U.S. copyrights were required to send a letter renewing their rights at the half-way point in the term. If they failed to do so, their copyright expired. In 1976, that solution was deemed too onerous, too prone to error, too disrespectful of inalienable "moral rights", or just plain too unprofitable, and was replaced with automatic copyrights that don't require registration and last forever.* It wasn't a bad solution, but the powers that be will never return to it.
(*Forever, 20 years at a time, that is.)
Time to re-read Red Mars (1992), Green Mars (1993), Blue Mars (1996) by Kim Stanley Robinson.
Or, to begin closer to the beginning, start with The Fountains of Paradise (1979) by da man, Arthur C. Clarke.
The proposal mentioned by TFA to tax some video games based on violent content is not coming from anyone in elected office. It is part of a package that includes abolishing all private property taxes, abolishing the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, and applying a $10,000 tax on any abortion.
It's fun reading if you can get past the spelling and grammar errors.
If the Constitution (1st Amend.) would allow them to prohibit the content, then they can tax it instead.
However, if the Constitution won't allow them to prohibit some content but not others, I can't see how they could tax that way.
Hurry! It'll finish terminating all those copyright lawyers in a minute or two. Then, it'll come for us.
Please put your strawmen away before they get burned.
Dare we hope that Obama can get the courts to burn down the PatRiot Act, executive privilege, and sovereign immunity all in one go?
Dear god, please make it stop before I have to learn French legislative procedure just to read /.
Before everyone loses their minds, note that squatting will not be a viable business model with these domains. From TFA:
The currently proposed application fee is $185,000, says Levins, plus an annual "continuance" fee of $25,000. If more than one company wants a suffix, there could be a bidding war.
The best part of them changing to "SyFy" is that now I can say I'm a scifi fan again.
Seen on a gamers' button:
"All I want is what's mine.
If it isn't nailed down, it's mine.
If I can pry it up, it wasn't nailed down".
(attributed to Collis Potter Huntington, a railroad baron who helped found the Union Pacific Railroad in the later 1800s)
Next question: was it deliberate? Was the misconduct deliberately carried out at the behest of Republican appointees in the DOJ to ensure that Stevens would not serve time?
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Clearly, the President is choosing something over our ideals. It's about time that he explained what he's choosing.
Agent Lynd likely hung up because he had some urgent calls to Phoenix to make.
I'd hope we'd NOT try to put all our country's energy eggs in this one basket.
Whyever not? When California did it with gas energy, nothing much happened.
More interesting is the contrast between that USA map and the one on page 3 of the report summary. Differences include more areas off the coasts mapped (e.g., near California/Oregon) and data for 50m above the surface, as well as extra-superb category names.
Well, TFA is just about incoherent as to what percentage of whose demand when could be produced from wind turbines where. This article is a great deal clearer about its claims.
Or, you could peruse the report summary itself.
From TFA:
It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
No, what it says is that Sec Com could demand any information from any person anywhere in U.S. jurisdiction, so long as that information somehow "concerns" such networks.
Overreach much?
A country with a 577-member body that allows 16 people to constitute quorum? If that's actually the case, that country deserves what it gets.
Say it ain't so.
Round 2 will be interesting. Will the GoogleMobile:
There are two good reasons not to take this film:
1. It's illegal.
2. You'll like the final version better if you haven't seen the draft.
Sure, you can get a little thrill from being first. That sort of thing will fade when you hit puberty.
Out of respect for the artistic integrity of the 20th Century Fox corporation? Now, that's funny.
Can I legally hook an ipod to my computer, load it with music from my iTunes, and give the ipod away?
One presumes that the White House created and paid for a separate account for the gift tunes.
OK, so NASA is unwilling to name the node after a living entertainer who regularly voices polarizing opinions. However, they want to save face and not appear to override the vote. Here's a solution: double down.
Allow Stephen Colbert (the character) to hold a second vote to select a Truthy, flag-waving name for the station. Stephen Colbert (the character) could have no end of fun with this. By closely controlling options in the second vote, NASA and Colbert (the person) could ensure a name that NASA could accept.
The floor is now open for suggestions (subject to host approval)!
All the organs of the body were having a meeting, trying to decide who was the one in charge.
After a while, the feet, stomach, eyes, and brain agreed that the asshole was in charge.