RIAA Wants Gov. to Delete Your Illegal Downloads

[LeeD]

It is a common practice that sufficiently old creative works are no longer covered by copyright.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

Expiration of copyright

The expiration of a copyright is more complex than that of a patent. Historically the United States has specified terms of a number of years following creation or publication; this number has been increased several times. Most other countries specify terms of a number of years following the death of the last surviving creator; this number varies from one country to another (50 years and 70 years are the most common), and has also been increased in many of them. See List of countries' copyright length. Legal traditions differ on whether a work in the public domain can have its copyright restored. Term extensions by the U.S. and Australia generally have not removed works from the public domain, but merely delayed the addition of works to it. By contrast, a European Union directive harmonizing the term of copyright protection was applied retroactively, restoring and extending the terms of copyright on material previously in the public domain.

 

[efficiency]

Quote from TraderZones:

So if you held the copyright/patent to something your parent did, it is ok for every else to personally deem your possession as "in the public domain". and use it in spite of your legal rights?

If your house was more than 40 years old, it would be right for others to declare it as "in the public domain" and come by and strip off your siding, windows, roofing, etc.?

Also, they could take any antiques you own (including cars, especially since they used to belong to someone who is now dead)? And chop down any trees over 40/50 years old on your property for firewood?

And since any land under any property you own is likely over that age (perhaps the land of your ancestors now dead), others can come in and build their own house on your land, because "in the public domain" ?

Another using the phrase "OK". Broad non-descript generic term.

Got some lame, loose analogies. None of which has anything to do with trading.

Patents are for 17 years, which is why we have generic drug companies such as Perrigo, Mylan Labs, and...............R&D

Instead of copyright infringement of intellectual property of record companies, perhaps you should give a little focus upon IF, when and how record companies dispense royalties to the underlying artists. The TRUE owners of the intellectual property.

You think the heirs of Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin get royalty checks in the mail?

Cost of production/packaging distribution versus ultimate retail price.

As for taking land, the Sioux were given reservations, considered sovereign nations...............until gold was discoverd. Reneged rather than renegade. Countless other examples.

Robbie Robertson made a disc of native American music. None of which he composed. Royalties to the "composers"?

There is also the concept of emminent domain, where a nation, state or municpality seizes a property for the "greater good". No choice in the matter.

Now, IF I was downloading and selling music for financial gain, that'd be another twist.

My house is only MY house as long as I pay the property taxes.

6000 posts in a mere two years says alot. With that magnitude, perhaps you should seek copyrights for the wealth of wizdum. You can fund the fees out of your vast, and no doubt consistent trading profits.

 

[efficiency]

Charlie "Bird" Parker is considered the father of Hard Bop jazz.

He was born and grew up in Kansas City KANSAS. He died in New York in 1955. He had no heirs.

He was buried beside his mother in Kansas City MISSOURI for decades.

About 11 years ago the City of Kansas City MISSOURI decided to exume his remains and re-inter them at 18th & Vine. Their used to be an annual summer jazz festival there, and now a tourist attraction. Bird Parker only played in that district when he was 16 and 17, not even a sideman. A wannabe. He made his mark in NY. 52nd Street.

I've never downloaded any Parker. I own one Verve CD of his music and two vinyl albums, both bought secondhand. WHO got the royalties? You're questioning MY ethics?

Oh, oh, concerning the vinyl, I converted each from analog to digital through a soundcard and burned them to CD. I guess someone was infringed upon, eh?

 

[TraderZones]

Quote from efficiency:

Another using the phrase "OK". Broad non-descript generic term.

Got some lame, loose analogies. None of which has anything to do with trading.

Patents are for 17 years, which is why we have generic drug companies such as Perrigo, Mylan Labs, and...............R&D

Instead of copyright infringement of intellectual property of record companies, perhaps you should give a little focus upon IF, when and how record companies dispense royalties to the underlying artists. The TRUE owners of the intellectual property.

You think the heirs of Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin get royalty checks in the mail?

Cost of production/packaging distribution versus ultimate retail price.

As for taking land, the Sioux were given reservations, considered sovereign nations...............until gold was discoverd. Reneged rather than renegade. Countless other examples.

Robbie Robertson made a disc of native American music. None of which he composed. Royalties to the "composers"?

There is also the concept of emminent domain, where a nation, state or municpality seizes a property for the "greater good". No choice in the matter.

Now, IF I was downloading and selling music for financial gain, that'd be another twist.

My house is only MY house as long as I pay the property taxes.

6000 posts in a mere two years says alot. With that magnitude, perhaps you should seek copyrights for the wealth of wizdum. You can fund the fees out of your vast, and no doubt consistent trading profits.

It was painful reading this response. Lousy spelling, trying to substitute personal opinion for prevailing law, 3rd grade logic, aimless content...

You did a better job of debunking yourself than anyone else could