Jump to content



Photo
copyright us congress republicans

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#16 roadwarrior

roadwarrior

    Mississippian by birth and by choice

  • 12,944 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 03
  • Location: Republic of Mississippi

Posted 17 November 2012 - 23:09

Hmm, I know the thread's about the "house republicans" but I posted it in back page news because, frankly, it has global implications. The US bullies other nations to follow its own domestic intellectual monopoly legislation (cf Wikileaks revelations about Spain's copyright law). Threads of a similar nature have stayed there when they've been from the EU or other European nations.

Actually, the US was bullied by European countries into signing onto the Berne Convention.


#17 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 18 November 2012 - 02:17

Right after the Presidential election last week, Chris Sprigman and Kal Raustiala penned an opinion piece suggesting that one way the Republicans could "reset", and actually attract the youth vote, would be to become the party of copyright reform.


The GOP clearly doesn't have a clue.

#18 Mr Nom Nom's

Mr Nom Nom's

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,407 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 11
  • OS: OS X 10.9.2
  • Phone: iPhone 5S 'Space Grey' (64GB)

Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:38

How are they not? Obama won by a margin of roughly 3 million votes, many of those young people who might be swayed by a policy change such as this.


Which is doubtful - it was the same excuse I remember when the centre left party in my country was voted back in. It had as much to do with substance as with the rhetoric - when the main leaders of your party are just plain mean and hating against LGBT, women, latinos, etc then it won't matter a single iota if you make a change in an area that has minimal impact when compared to issues such as abortion rights, gay marriage, immigration etc.

Except, as noted, that is the exact opposite of the original intent of the copyright laws in place in our constitution. Some how, over the years, "for limited times" has come to be interpreted as "the lifetime of the author + 70 years". Hardly what the framers of the constitution had in mind (the original term was 14 years and an optional 14 year extension).


You can thank Disney, Mickey Mouse and the Americana that is associated with it.