Christian Arrested!

[Sava]

You realize, of course, that without the venom your side throws her way, she'd hardly sell a book? She never had the slightest chance of establishing a local theocracy in defiance of the Supreme Court; she could have been ignored. "Those idiots" are her customer base. "You idiots" are her marketing team. Can't beat that pisses-off-the-liberals street cred.

We already know you are terrible human being. No need to constantly remind everyone.

[self biased]

It looks like Davis and Huckabee are getting sued by EMI for not securing the rights to "eye of the tiger" for public use.

[Sava]

It looks like Davis and Huckabee are getting sued by EMI for not securing the rights to "eye of the tiger" for public use.

heard about this... glad to know it is happening

[Elok]

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, if I were them I wouldn't want my music associated with such a flagrant display of public jackassery and political ass-kissing. On the other, that song is a year older than I am, and really ought to have passed into public domain three to five years ago.

[self biased]

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, if I were them I wouldn't want my music associated with such a flagrant display of public jackassery and political ass-kissing. On the other, that song is a year older than I am, and really ought to have passed into public domain three to five years ago.

Eh, I'm okay with a person profiting on something they create until they die. I'm even okay with the media company profiting for a little while after that person's death, but not too long.

[rah]

While, in general, I agree with that.......

So you think M. Jackson's kids shouldn't profit from their dad's music. (an exception to the general rule)

[N35t0r]

I can agree to death or children majority of age.

[grumbler]

I don't believe thta the public domain should be denied works for even the life of the author; that's too great a sacrifice for the return. I think that the early US and British laws of the late 18th and early 19th Century had it about right: fourteen years as the initial copyright, with the author getting an additional 14 years if he outlived the first 14-year grant. I see no justification for the author's children getting a grant of copyright other than that provided for in the 14 years.

[N35t0r]

Should patents also be granted for 14 years?

[giblets]

I think patents are normally 20 years in the US, which isn't that different from 14-28 years.

[Dinner]

Patient laws in the US are now getting completely absurd.

[DinoDoc]

Patient laws in the US are now getting completely absurd.

I thought you liked Obamacare.

[Dinner]

Please stop being dumb.

[DinoDoc]

Please stop being dumb.

Please learn how to spell patent. Patient is an entirely different word.

[Elok]

Should patents also be granted for 14 years?

Research costs for some things (like medicines) might be utterly ruinous without a longer patent. I'm conflicted about Monsanto's patenting of genes at present; check back next Friday to see what my opinion is then. Creative works have no such consideration. In fact, on reflection I'd say this is a good example of why copyright needs to expire sooner. This use did not even threaten the holder's right to make money off of it; it's a silly reference to the Rocky film the song was originally made for. I don't think anybody thinks that this use implies that the eighties band that made the song approves of the politicians involved, or anything. Most people under forty likely don't even know offhand who sang the stupid song. They're using their copyright to try and control when and how their creative work gets used, decades after it came out. At some point, it needs to pass out of their hands and become public domain so people can make dumb cliche film references without facing a lawsuit. Even d-bag theocrat politicians should have that power.