Discussion of all things related to Public Domain

[tom poe <tompoe AT renonevada.net>]

On Thursday 11 April 2002 10:27, Don Marti wrote:
> The American Bar Association's Intellectual Property Law section is
> reporting that the association plans to file an amicus brief with
> the Supreme Court claiming that the 1998 retroactive extension of
> the term of copyright is constitutional.
>
> http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/apr02chair.html
>
> "The case could present a field day for those who have an anti-IP
> sentiment-- those who say information wants to be free, less
> protection is necessarily better, the public domain promotes
> the progress of science and useful arts better than IP, and when
> technology advances, IP rights must be cut back."
>
> Does this honestly represent a mainstream legal organization or did
> the copyright extremists take over the "Intellectual Property Law"
> section while the mainstream folks weren't looking?


Hi:  The way I look at it - - -[aahh, remembering the article in Playboy 
several years ago, when James Caan said, as he turned to face the 
interviewer, with his eyes crossed, "The way I look at it . . . ], if the 
Supreme Court decided to come out of the woodwork and admit through its 
handling of the last presidential fiasco, formerly election, that they're 
just political puppets, why not the ABA?  Besides, extending copyright 
protection at the expense of individual freedoms simply ensures a broader 
range of clients and revenues, eh?
Thanks,
Tom Poe
Reno, NV
http://www.studioforrecording/
http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/
http://renotahoe.pm.org/