REALLY OT: News Flash
Miles Fidelman wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
BTW, where in the Constitution of these USA does it state that Copyright
must be limited?
Well, this is getting WAY off topic, but...
Article I, Section 8.
The actual language in the constitution states that "The Congress shall
have the power to ... promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,
by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
Note the word "limited."
Yes, that is an adjective modifying the noun "Times", not "exclusive
Right". Are you saying that Bono argued for making copyright eternal?
Do you have a cite?
Also note that arguably, if the "exclusive Right" doesn't "promote the
Progress of Science and useful Arts" then Congress might not actually
have the right to grant a copyright or patent (e.g., when someone uses
ownership of a patent to prevent release of new technology, that sure
doesn't promote progress).
Now you are getting into a really grey area. Each Branch of Government
in these USA has the duty to interpret and apply the Constitution as
it understands it. AFAICT, it is the responsibility of Congress to
ascertain whether any particular form of exclusive Right fall within
the bounds of promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts.
I suppose granting a 1000 year copyright falls within the scope
of "limited Times".
BTW, Benjamin Franklin opposed Patents, argued against that clause of
the Constitution, and placed all his discoveries and inventions in the
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!