Unfortunately 20 years. Far longer than the technologies they cover last. However, that has never stopped a patent holder from suing people using 19 year old patents.
This reminds me of ole Jack Thompson. The world was against him and he ended up representing himself as the Florida State Bar tried him for 32 counts of misconduct and eventually ruled that he was guilty of 29 of those and was permanently disbarred. I am not sure if he was unwilling to find someone to represent him or if no one wanted to.
Never mind. I must have misheard. From the AP article on NPR.org:
But the judges agreed with Lucasfilm's lawyers — and a lower court — that Ainsworth had violated Lucas's copyright in the United States by selling costumes there.
In the NPR story this morning, I got the impression that the Judge was merely pointing out that although he lost his case in the US under US copyright laws, that has no bearing on the state of UK copyright and how the costume is fine under UK law.
At least that was the impression I got from the NPR report.
We just need a system like that used in Minority report. Let's find us a handful of people with precognitive powers, put them in a sensory deprivation chamber and let them predict crime before it happens so that we stop it before it even has a chance. That is the only way. We need to do it now.
I think it is a pretty good illustration of the absurdity of the current IP "ownership" mentality many companies.
Seriously, how many people actually care about a game played in 1980 let alone actually watch it? Any person who actually has any interest in it will read about it rather than search for a clip of it buried in a politicians campaign ad.
It is sad that even with politicians getting cease and desist letters like this, and there are other examples such as McCain getting a c&d for daring to post a video of an interview he was on, they will still not make the needed changes to protect fair use.
Here is my problem with this. I have an internet connection at home. I have a room mate who gets his three strikes and my internet connection is lost because he infringed on my network.
I lose my internet connection for something I did not do.
Or better yet, I have a home wireless internet connection. I have secured it, but someone manages to hack it and use it anyway. I get these 3 strikes for something that someone else did and I lose my internet.
Here's another one. Someone spoofs their IP and uses that to infringe. Unfortunately, that spoofed IP is the same as my IP. I get 3 strikes and lose my internet connection.
Now these are three cases where it is not my fault and I still lose my internet connection and am inconvenienced.
Now even if I was the one who infringed, whose to say that my infringement was not fair use? I would have to go through an expensive and time consuming process to prove my fair use and in the mean time, I am unable to have a home internet connection.
None of this is fair. Nor is it proportional to the offense.
We will have a mandatory registration to a national infringer database. Those registered are barred from the internet. They are barred from living within 300 feet of an open wifi connection. They are barred from living within 1000 feet of and entering any school or library. They are only allowed to work in coal mines or other similar vocation. They must wear at all times a yellow copyright symbol, no smaller than 3 inches in diameter, upon their person at all times and in plain view.
I think you only have to get pork to around 168 degree Fahrenheit to make it safe for consumption, so I think that is probably the extent of human endurance of temperature.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
There is no exception. Every time the exception panel is held, that is the first request made and most every time it is the first to be rejected. The closest thing to a true consumer oriented exception has been granted is in specifically allowing jailbreaking on an iPhone to change carriers.
On the post: Hulu Sued For Violating 'TV Guide' Patent
Re:
On the post: Hulu Sued For Violating 'TV Guide' Patent
Re: Unbelievable
On the post: Hulu Sued For Violating 'TV Guide' Patent
Re:
http://www.wikipatents.com/US-Patent-6666666/multi-chamber-positive-displacement-fluid-device
On the post: What Do They Say About The Lawyer Who Represents Himself?
Jack Thompson
Fun times.
On the post: 20th Century Fox Claims 'Dice Age' Game Sounds Too Much Like Ice Age Movie
Let's Die.
On the post: Apple Does Not Have More Cash Than The US Gov't; Stop Saying That It Does
On the post: Feds Say They Can Search Bradley Manning's Friend's Laptop Because They Can
Re:
On the post: Forget The Stormtrooper Costumes, Get Worried About UK Courts Saying They Can Judge US Copyright Law
Re:
But the judges agreed with Lucasfilm's lawyers — and a lower court — that Ainsworth had violated Lucas's copyright in the United States by selling costumes there.
On the post: Forget The Stormtrooper Costumes, Get Worried About UK Courts Saying They Can Judge US Copyright Law
At least that was the impression I got from the NPR report.
On the post: Fox Decides To Drive Fans To Piracy, Rather Than Giving Legitimate Options
Re:
On the post: Finnish Police Respond To The Norwegian Tragedy By Increasing Internet Surveillance
On the post: ABC Sports Threatens To Hit Tim Pawlenty With Copyright Infringement Claim Over Miracle On Ice Footage
Re: My god! A cease & desist letter!
Seriously, how many people actually care about a game played in 1980 let alone actually watch it? Any person who actually has any interest in it will read about it rather than search for a clip of it buried in a politicians campaign ad.
On the post: ABC Sports Threatens To Hit Tim Pawlenty With Copyright Infringement Claim Over Miracle On Ice Footage
On the post: UK: Sex Offenders More Deserving Of Internet Access Than Infringers
Re:
I lose my internet connection for something I did not do.
Or better yet, I have a home wireless internet connection. I have secured it, but someone manages to hack it and use it anyway. I get these 3 strikes for something that someone else did and I lose my internet.
Here's another one. Someone spoofs their IP and uses that to infringe. Unfortunately, that spoofed IP is the same as my IP. I get 3 strikes and lose my internet connection.
Now these are three cases where it is not my fault and I still lose my internet connection and am inconvenienced.
Now even if I was the one who infringed, whose to say that my infringement was not fair use? I would have to go through an expensive and time consuming process to prove my fair use and in the mean time, I am unable to have a home internet connection.
None of this is fair. Nor is it proportional to the offense.
On the post: UK: Sex Offenders More Deserving Of Internet Access Than Infringers
I propose a new law
We will have a mandatory registration to a national infringer database. Those registered are barred from the internet. They are barred from living within 300 feet of an open wifi connection. They are barred from living within 1000 feet of and entering any school or library. They are only allowed to work in coal mines or other similar vocation. They must wear at all times a yellow copyright symbol, no smaller than 3 inches in diameter, upon their person at all times and in plain view.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Associated Press Carelessness Reaches Boiling Point
Re:
I have never tested this theory though.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
On the post: Associated Press Carelessness Reaches Boiling Point
Re:
On the post: Associated Press Carelessness Reaches Boiling Point
Re: Re: It's just a future headline
Next >>