Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #240285

OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)

From rhkramer@gmail.com
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)
Date 2021-09-23 13:40 +0200
Message-ID <D0vf3-2Ca-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <D0hON-2Iz-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <D0lfH-4BV-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <D0mv7-5CM-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 10:12:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> Or the ARRL forgot to renew the copyright. Copyrights were originally
> issued for a period of 7 years, renewable once for an additional 7
> years. 

Hmm, without looking it up, I thought the 7/7 years was for patents, and 
copyright was a little different (maybe like 13/13?)?  (But Gene probably 
remembers better than I do.)

> Along comes Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse, and Walt had money
> enough to get the law changed so we have the current never expires
> situation by including corporations such as Disney in it definitions of
> authors. If its ever been renewed. But the law today gives me automatic
> copyright over what I write without additional public notice, I think
> for 90 years after I die.

Something like that, but doesn't sound quite right (wish I had a better 
memory).  Previously copyrighted works are coming into the "public domain" 
year by year, about 95 years after -- oh, maybe it is after the author's 
death?  Maybe there is an alternate path to copyright expiring?  Not sure how 
it works if a corporation owns a copyright -- I don't think it is perpetual.

And, at least some of the relevant laws differ by nation.
 
> There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered as
> the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would ever
> generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a good
> idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for being
> creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft pure and
> simple, 

Hmm, I don't think the copyright law nor the government award the copyright to 
a corporation.  If a corporation gets a copyright (or patent) that is based on 
some explicit contractual or implicit (like the "work for hire" doctrine)  
agreement


> Cheers, Gene Heskett

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

The future of computing. harryweaver@tutanota.com - 2021-09-22 23:20 +0200
  Re: The future of computing. Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-09-23 03:00 +0200
    Re: The future of computing. harryweaver@tutanota.com - 2021-09-23 04:00 +0200
    Re: The future of computing. Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 04:20 +0200
      Re: The future of computing. Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-09-23 04:30 +0200
        Re: The future of computing. Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 05:20 +0200
          Re: The future of computing. Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-09-23 12:40 +0200
      OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-09-23 13:40 +0200
        Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 14:50 +0200
        Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-09-24 09:50 +0200
          Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-09-24 15:30 +0200

csiph-web