111–120 of 203 posts
"This law, also known as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, Sonny Bono Act, or (derisively) the Mickey Mouse Protection Act"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
Mickey mouse copyright vs works of Jewish girl killed by the Nazis.
Lots of rage here against the US government, little rage against the Anne Frank Fonds that actually asserts the copyright. If you really feel so strongly then go and rail against the foundation who could transfer the book into the public domain with least a million times (literally) less difficulty than it would take to get US copyright law changed to have the same effect. http://www.annefrank.ch/qa-en.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This logic is the reason why we have so many archaic laws surrounding the technology. Too often our community simply decides it is easier to ignore the law in question than trying to fight it and so we withdraw ourselves from the debate. It isn't our job as technologist to build tools to circumvent the law. It is our job as technologist to educate politicians and the greater population as a whole why these issues are…
Politicians don't get educated. They get bought. Do you have as much money as copyright industry? No? Then, no, you can't have your sensible laws. You'll have theirs. The only action you can take is to ignore those unenforcible.
Then you need to fix your political system before you can fix the law. As an outsider looking in it seems like sorting out how campaigns are financed would be a good first step and that seems like something Bernie Sanders wants to and probably can fix. So the opportunity is there for you to take if the issue is important enough to you.
That's barbaric. That's why civil disobedience is the only adequate answer to the current overreach of copyright in the united states. It's up to us, technologists, to create and disseminate tools to help out in the dismantlement of an absurd system that is obsolete in the digital age.
Sometimes a demonstrative, grotesque civil obedience is even better.
https://archive.org/details/AnneFrankTheDiaryOfAYoungGirl Claims it is open source. The torrent somebody asked for: https://archive.org/download/AnneFrankTheDiaryOfAYoungGirl/A...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm as appalled as the next man by this ridiculous copyright situation, but they could also be trying to ensure that nobody can modify the work in a way that would be disrespectful to the memory of Anne Frank. That's a real concern, given that there are a lot of Neo-Nazis in the world.
I doubt neo-nazis care about the copyright of a book written by "a dirty Jew."
I'm just saying that the motivation around holding copyright might not only be monetary.
Ok, I know, first reaction, utter STUPIDITY of the human race. But don't let it down OK? There are some good, smart, people out there that care about it all. They're out there, they really are. Just keep looking. :-)
Lots of rage here against the US government, little rage against the Anne Frank Fonds that actually asserts the copyright. If you really feel so strongly then go and rail against the foundation who could transfer the book into the public domain with least a million times (literally) less difficulty than it would take to get US copyright law changed to have the same effect. http://www.annefrank.ch/qa-en.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, in real terms, voting for a party that isn't democrat or republican in the US is a waste of time. The idea that eventually there'd be enough of a groundswell of support that another party would even become competitive? It just isn't going to happen with the way the US electoral system works. The Lib Dems in the UK have been fighting a similar fight for decades and still have little-to-no representation despite…
> The Lib Dems in the UK have been fighting a similar fight for decades and still have little-to-no representation despite consistently getting 20%ish of the vote. FWIW: They were in the previous coalition government, so they got very good representation for their votes. Unfortunately their voters hated what they did, so their vote collapsed at the next election (and the party they were in government with grew in vot…
And no, they didn't get 'good representation' anyway. They got 9% of the seats on 23% of the vote when they went into coalition, and in the last election, got 1% of the seats on 8% of the vote. Even as a junior party holding the balance of power in a coalition, they didn't have the clout they should have, from a percentage-of-votes-cast perspective.
But regardless of how you slice it, it's still a clear example of how a FPTP voting system ends up in a two-party political system.