Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 24, 2008, 06:10:02 PMQuote from: Cain on August 24, 2008, 10:33:35 AM
They totally ignored it, though. America was infamous for copyright violations throughout the 18th century, and if they had followed it, the USA would probably look more like a giant Amish farm right now. I also note it doesnt define the limited time period, often the main concern of serious copyright revision activists.
The time, apparently, was to be defined by federal law. And so it has been.Quote from: Cain on August 24, 2008, 10:33:35 AM
Oh fuck, I don't want to be drawn into this debate again. My point is fining someone in the region of $1000 per illegally downloaded song is exactly the same mentality as giving a kid 10 years in jail for smoking a spliff. My comments about finding a better business model can found in Think For Yourself.
Well, that's a matter of divorcing congressmen from special interests (such as the RIAA). My recommended approach for doing this is tarring and feathering.
1. Then I see no problem with people agitiating for a change. Most people worried about excessive copyright protection want to see people get paid, but they do want to deal with people who abuse the system - like Monsanto, or the pharmaceuticals, who either patent things they never owned or else use them to create monopolies for certain cures, which invariably cost more than many can afford.
2. And therein lies the problem.