It's my understanding of the copyright law that if you publish without a copyright statement, it becomes public domain. And public domain material cannot be copyrighted once it has been released to the public. While it's true that you no longer need to submit the material to the Gov to obtain a copyright, you are still required to place a copyright statement on the material to protect your rights.
Sorry, but you're wrong on all three counts. Copyright is automatic, the moment a work is created. You can explicitly state that is is pubic domain, otherwise the copyright is in place. A copyright statement is not necessary, and frankly, on usenet posts and short comments looks stupid.
Nevada is the only state that mandates a "None of The Above" selection on statewide ballots. They've had it there since '76, and NOTA has only won twice since then. Their law is non-binding, meaning that if NOTA wins the second place human gets the job, but they get it knowing that most people prefer Nobody.
An even better approach would be to make it binding, which forces a new election if no one likes a slate of lousy candidates. But if it were available we probably wouldn't see nearly as many lousy candidates in the first place. For instance, in the last New York State elections nearly everyone hated both D'Amato and Schumer. If NOTA were in effect it's likely that one, or both, parties would have give us a better choice.
For a longer rant on the subject check out the article The Frog and Peach in The Hittman Chronicle.
What's needed is an agency that will require physical authentication, as well as a passport and maybe other ID, before issuing a key, and then provide an easy way to look up the public key of each individual.
Why does it have to be a government agency? Would you trust a pair of keys given to you by the government?
A private agency would have a reputation to worry about. Better yet, why not have a couple of private agencies who would provide this service for a fee? A couple of private agencies would not only give us a choice, but give each agency an incentive to be very careful about authentication, and making sure that when you walk out with your keys no one else has a record of them.
And before you all complain, I know that you can't trust the government in matters like these.
So let's not. Let's let the private sector do it. They can do it better, faster, more reliably, and cheaper than any government agency could.
Sounds like a good dotcom business. Is there a venture capitalist in the house? I only need twenty or thirty million.
Slashdot Mirror
It's my understanding of the copyright law that if you publish without a copyright statement, it becomes public domain. And public domain material cannot be copyrighted once it has been released to the public. While it's true that you no longer need to submit the material to the Gov to obtain a copyright, you are still required to place a copyright statement on the material to protect your rights.
Sorry, but you're wrong on all three counts. Copyright is automatic, the moment a work is created. You can explicitly state that is is pubic domain, otherwise the copyright is in place. A copyright statement is not necessary, and frankly, on usenet posts and short comments looks stupid.
Nevada is the only state that mandates a "None of The Above" selection on statewide ballots. They've had it there since '76, and NOTA has only won twice since then. Their law is non-binding, meaning that if NOTA wins the second place human gets the job, but they get it knowing that most people prefer Nobody.
An even better approach would be to make it binding, which forces a new election if no one likes a slate of lousy candidates. But if it were available we probably wouldn't see nearly as many lousy candidates in the first place. For instance, in the last New York State elections nearly everyone hated both D'Amato and Schumer. If NOTA were in effect it's likely that one, or both, parties would have give us a better choice.
For a longer rant on the subject check out the article The Frog and Peach in The Hittman Chronicle.Why does it have to be a government agency? Would you trust a pair of keys given to you by the government?
A private agency would have a reputation to worry about. Better yet, why not have a couple of private agencies who would provide this service for a fee? A couple of private agencies would not only give us a choice, but give each agency an incentive to be very careful about authentication, and making sure that when you walk out with your keys no one else has a record of them.
And before you all complain, I know that you can't trust the government in matters like these.
So let's not. Let's let the private sector do it. They can do it better, faster, more reliably, and cheaper than any government agency could.
Sounds like a good dotcom business. Is there a venture capitalist in the house? I only need twenty or thirty million.