First proposal:
- While keeping the Copyright Office within the Legislative Branch, separate it from the Library of Congress. I have previously suggested the more dramatic action of joining the Copyright Office with the Patent & Trademark Office to allow for better coordination of rights.
- Modernize copyright office technology. PLEASE DO THIS!
- [Copyright-Reform.pdf]
Mike Masnik (Techdirt) writes: Congress Proposes First Stages Of Copyright Reform, And It’s Not Good.
Washington lobbying is much worse and deeper than previously reported. See this article: link to precursorblog.com
link to server6.kproxy.com
Washington lobbying is much worse and deeper than previously reported.
I guess it would depend on what you’d been reading.
Who’d you vote for, by the way? Were you duped, like Ned, into believing that the maniac elect was going to “drain the swamp”? Or did you write in Bernie as a “protest” like your bff, “anon”?
Let everybody know. You’re a very serious person so I’m sure your thought process will be fascinating. Share it!
“I guess it would depend on what you’d been reading”
Not sure that the facts presented have any dependency on what NW is reading.
Or what you read for that matter.
Why in the world would you think otherwise?
How are you liking the white supremacist elect, “anon”?
Not at all Malcolm – do you want to return now to the point here?
do you want to return now to the point here
You mean NW’s ridiculous whining about “washington lobbying”?
NW doesn’t care about “washington lobbying.” And neither do you. You care about “washington lobbying” in the same you pretend to care about “judicial activism.” In short, it only bothers you when it affects your bottom line. You’re just a magnificent hypocrite, always have been, always will be.
You clearly mistake “concern with affecting patent law” as some type of “concern with bottom line.”
Maybe if you actually focused on patent law (and actually paid attention to what some of us actually say), instead of being so over-eager to apply your inane ad hominem and short script G-g-g-grifter accusations, you would be able to engage in an inte11ectually honest dialogue.
You clearly mistake “concern with affecting patent law” as some type of “concern with bottom line.”
Remember, folks: “anon” is an alleged expert on patents (and presently unemployed — impossible to figure out how that could possible be! LOL) who has done nothing here for ten years except (1) try to squelch any criticism of patent maximalists (like himself and his mentor) and their rhetorical strategies for lining their pockets; and (2) promote every effort and recite every script that comes his way that would result in More Patents, Easier to Enforce, All the Time. That includes smearing every one that disagrees with him with labels such as “commies”, “k-llers”, “the Gestapo”, “leftists”, “socialists”, “anti-patent forces”, and “ivory towerists”.
And he does this because (wait for it) he cares about “patent quality.” Riiiiiiiiiight. And he’s totally not about the politics. Sure. We got it, “anon.” Makes total sense.
Your innuendo and false spin based on your feelings and nothing more impresses no one, Malcolm.
Again, maybe you should pay more attention to actual law and to what I actually say.
maybe you should pay more attention to actual law and to what I actually say.
Nobody pays more attention to you and your c0h0rt’s b.s. than I do, “anon.” And the primary reason for doing that is to document the damage that you guys do, and how you go about doing it (which is mainly by tr0lling and spreading self-serving l i e s).
But you knew this already. Everybody does! Because I’m not letting anybody forget it.
Here’s a two second example: NW — “anon”‘s bff and All Time High Five Buddy — has repeatedly asserted that it makes no sense for judges to reject patents on “technology” (aka “software”) that is so awesome that it will do the work of judging in lieu of human beings. At the same time, “anon” — a super deep and serious person and totally not a hypocrite who will do and say literally anything — never quits spewing nonsense about how “software isn’t logic.”
But notice “anon”, Mr. “Int ell ectual H0nesty” himself, never wants to have this discussion about “robot judges” with the pr0moters of “robot judges.” Gee, I wonder why.
Just the tip of the iceberg of hypocrisy, “anon.” Most of the rest of it can be found at other bl0gs, and most of that is right there on the surface (because you guys can’t help yourselves).
You say spewing that software isn’t logic,
But you never seem able to reply to the simple reply that I post to you: can you obtain a copyright on any aspect of a “logic.”
All you do is the same as you have ever done: spout your feelings and your mischaracterizations of the law, of facts, and of what others post.
Yay Decade of Decadence.
Second proposal, keep Copyright where it is, split Trademarks out from Patents.
Concentrations of power are never a good thing.
Eliminate position of director. Restore the commissioner to his prior position of power.
Can someone provide a link to Dennis’s original suggestion and how “co-ordination” of rights is achievable or desirable.
What does “co-ordination” of separate independent rights mean?
Masnick…
A (non-legal) word of advice: consider the source.
That may well be true but he is one of the only major “mainstream” voices that talks about copyright issues on the regular.
Instead of your normal attack the messenger B.S., if you could distinctly point out areas that you disagree, that would be great.
Sincerely,
Everyone
Attack the messenger? What was the attack?
My Francis, you sure are sensitive today.
Don’t pay any attention to “anon”, OSQ. I mean, consider the source.
Lol – consider the source about me – most definitely.
Of course that does not mean “don’t pay attention,” as even Malcolm directly above states that HE pays attention.
Of course, what we (the royal we) need to see is more than just “paying attention” from Malcolm, but we need him to engage in an inte11ectually honest manner (and leave his short and stale script of ad hominem and accusing others of that which he does out of the picture).
Just
Won’t
Happen
(and we have a decade of proof in the archives)
Comments are closed.