Semi-OT: Congress about to limit artists' copyright rights

[Joe Fish]

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Jeffrey Watts
<jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com> wrote:
> The issue is that this is _not_ the custom, and never has been.  If I
> write a book or paint a painting, it's mine, and if someone
> plagiarizes or copies my painting I can sue them for damages.  This is
> how it's always been.  They're proposing instead to change it so that
> I must go out and pay someone to "register" my work - the supposition
> being that unless I go out to "register" it, it's public domain.
>

Do you really think you should be posting such strong opinions on
something you so obviously grievously ignorant about?

Registration requirements *ARE* the norm, they only went away 30 or so
years ago.

As far as the OVERALL history of copyright, and how its been
implemented, its traditional customs, what it has ACTUALLY
accomplished, and what its actual Constitutional purpose is (hint: its
not to create a welfare system for artists, or to allow them to own
ideas, or even to OWN implementations of those ideas), you need to do
A LOT of reading ... I recommend starting with the Lessig books ...





JOE