On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
> > license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
> > the book's content, but has every reason to be "protected" from
> > modification. These particular words have a value that must be protected.
>
> I'll put you down as being in favor of eternal copyright, then.
Give me a break. I've never said that, and your suggestion that what I
said implies I believe your suggestion is ... stupid.
This is exactly the kind of "distraction by misdirection" that I so
greatly detest.
>
> "The Congress shall have the power to PROMOTE THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE
> AND USEFUL ARTS, by securing for LIMITED TIMES to authors and inventors
> the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"
>
And in 10 or 15 years the historic material in my book, (not to mention
the technical content ;-) will not matter one way or another. If there
_is_ any historical significance to this content, other forces will
protect it.
> (Emphasis added.)
>
> What a tragedy that the value of all works published before 1926 has
> been irrevocably lost because we're not protecting them anymore.
Well, the fact is that those "old" works are protected specifically
because they have survived. The Declaration of Independance needs no
copyright to protect it. (However, I've been greatly disturbed by the
interpretation our present government places on certain phrases found
there...)
The real problem with most of those pre-26 books is that I can't find them
in print today...
I actually agree with you, (If I haven't made a stupid assumption based on
your initial statement ;-) eternal copyright doesn't stimulate creativity.
Just look at the new and interesting stories being told by Hollywood about
everyone from Mr. I. Crane, to Peter Pan. All possible by the expiration
of those copyrights on the original books.
While I'm not sure that M. Mouse should be owned by anyone but Uncle Walt,
I understand the fear of the current copyright holder, given that I am in
direct contact with the spirit of the original Mr. Disney. He has some
very clear ideas about the uses of this icon, and they would not set well
with the current "owner". Maybe I should find a lawyer and argue in court
that the original copyright holder should be given back control of his
intelectual property...
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux" _-_-_-_-_-_-
_- _-
_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_- Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road _-
_- e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-
_- _-
_-_-_-_-_- Released under the GNU Free Documentation License _-_-_-_-
available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
