Comments on: The Register wants reform http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/ Blog, news, books Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:56:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.2 By: Susanypn http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/#comment-28648 Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:08:12 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2005/06/the_register_wants_reform.html#comment-28648 We en l铆nea que prometen la alta calidad y shippng priceMBT Mujer Kisumu Gris Azul Sandalias,Esta mujer rejuvenecida perenne MBT Kisumu Gris sandalias azules es tan c贸modo como funcional, que ya es decir bastanteAfter sending the product,1-9 days blow in! 3This means less pain on mbt shoes boots the feet and joints and a faster recovery time after a workoutBuy Now & Save Unregulated rid of Shipping In fact, the MBT shoes are so designed that they replicate the rocking suggestion that one experiences when walking on soft sand or grassSecured Purchase Purchase from our website is 100% safe Broadway, in Anaheim, California, brothers Paul Van Doren, James Van Doren, and three other partners opened up their start storeSecured Purchase Purchase from our website is 100% safe

]]>
By: Joseph Pietro Riolo http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/#comment-19498 Sat, 25 Jun 2005 12:18:49 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2005/06/the_register_wants_reform.html#comment-19498 To Nari Lee,

Let’s see what the U.S. Constitution says.
It says, “To promote the Progress of Science
and useful Arts, by securing for limited
Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries;”.

The key receivers in that clause are authors
and inventors. So, any change to the U.S.
copyright law that will benefit authors is
justifiable under the clause. However, not
all changes are justifiable because of the
constraints as imposed by “limited Times”,
“Writings”, and First Amendment. The removal
of compulsory right benefits authors, does
not violate the constraint of “limited
Times”, does not violate the constraint of
“Writings”, and does not violate the First
Amendment. So, there is nothing wrong with
it in respect to the U.S. Constitution.
The responsibility for balancing the
interests of authors and the public rests
on Congress.

One immediate benefit from removal of
compulsory right is the reduction of
the already complex U.S. copyright law
by about 2,800 words (a little more than
5 pages)! :-)

Joseph Pietro Riolo
<riolo@voicenet.com>

Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this
comment in the public domain.

]]>
By: nari lee http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/#comment-19497 Sat, 25 Jun 2005 10:07:22 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2005/06/the_register_wants_reform.html#comment-19497 How would this removal of compulsory licensing justifiable under Constitution of the US? As a person who does not know anything aboutt he US Constititution, I am so curious that while there are doctrine such as eminent domain exist and even reaffirmed by the Supreme court, there could a move to remove equivalent implementation in Copyright statutes be jsutifiable?

]]>
By: Joey Esperanza http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/#comment-19496 Sat, 25 Jun 2005 03:48:27 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2005/06/the_register_wants_reform.html#comment-19496 Anyone who wants to email/contact Marybeth Peters at the copyright office to express their views should not hesitate to do so. Of course, don’t spam or harass her – but if enough people make their opinions known mabey she will listen?

Email: mpet@loc.gov
voice: 202-707-8359
Fax: 202 707 8366

]]>
By: Some guy http://www.lessig.org/2005/06/the-register-wants-reform/#comment-19495 Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:39:11 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2005/06/the_register_wants_reform.html#comment-19495 s/Coyprights/Copyrights/; # first line

s/Registrer/Register/; # last line

]]>