Book People Archive

Re: Copyright Term Extensions (was Re: RIP Jim Baen) (fwd)

I have voiced my surprise to Mr. Ockerbloom that he is allowing messages
of this nature while holding and/or withholding my own messages.

I note that I received the list copy of this message even before Jose's
direct email to me arrived, meaning that there was no delay in messages
coming to me, while I perceive a major delay in my own via the list.

[Moderator: See bwlow for an explanation of what "this message"
 refers to, plus further comments from me. - JMO]

In this particular case, I think it should appear obvious to call that
no additional information has been provided by Mr. Menendez, who takes
not his own advice to simply stop repeating himself.

Therefore I am taking this opportunity on myself to slow things down.

My parting comments are for further research as there is plenty from
many reliable and valid sources to conclusively demonstrate that the
copyright laws of the world, including the earliest and latest in US
copyright history, dating back to The Statute of Anne precendent and
even before that to the aforementioned "Statute of Mary [1557] to an
assortment of Disney and WIPO driven copyright laws during the spans
of my own involvement in publishing.

No one seems to be denying that the copyright law as mentioned above
were generated by the publishing industries of their times.

Thus it seems accepted that the earliest copyright laws, successful,
failed, and in between, were the work of The Stationers Guild or Co.

It also seems equally well accepted that the US copyright acts 1976,
1998, etc., were the work of Disney, WIPO, and supporting cast.

Why anyone would presuppose that the elimination of public domain as
source material for the first high speed steam powered press of 1830
patent registration by the US Copyright Act of 1831 was coincidence,
while accepting that the origin an recent history of our copyrights,
such as they were, were NOT concidence is beyond the pale.

Personally, I don't believe in coincidence, either in copyrights, or
in email deliveries.


I leave it to you to decide for yourselves, as it should be, hoping,
and hoping aqgain that you will not let the sand thrown in the gears
stop you from what should be quite clear contemplation.

Until later,


Thanks!!!

Give the world eBooks in 2006!!!

Michael S. Hart
Founder
Project Gutenberg

Blog at http://hart.pglaf.org


[Moderator: The message being referred to by Michael above is the one
 that's archived at 
 http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/bparchive/?year=2006&post=2006-08-11,3
 This was quoted in full (including the Book People signature) in the
 original submission; I've snipped it here, but you can visit the URL
 above if you want to review its content and nature, and see whether
 or not it matches Michael's description above.

 As regards moderation, email turnaround times will vary within the
 1-business-day service level I strive for, especially during times
 like these when I'm busy enough that I usually only have one interval
 per day to send through posts.  I do not play favorites with
 whose posts go through faster.  (So far.  I reserve the right
 to crack down on folks who persist in arguing with the ref, but if
 I do so, that will be by rejecting their posts, not by preferentially
 inserting delays in their propagation.)

 We've seen some interesting facts and historical references
 presented on the thread, I think, but we've also seen a fair bit of it
 dedicated to the two participants sniping at each other, and now at the
 moderator, when they could be arguing more towards general interests of
 the list as a whole.  (And other than my own summary on Friday, no one
 but Michael and Jose seems to have participated in the thread, even though
 it's been going for a while.)  At this point, then, I'll let Jose have
 one more post to rebut any remaining on-topic points if he wishes;
 but after that, unless other folks want to jump in with more
 topical points or questions, I'll be closing this exchange.  - JMO]