[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] > So, 70 years after death is "legally correct" whilst "20 years" wasn't? > The government keep extending copyright wayyyyy beyond it's original > purpose. > > So, the legal purpose of copyright is what now? Certainly not "to encourage > creativity and scientific endeavour". Throttle it, maybe.
Note the date below (1855): http://lysanderspooner.org/intellect/contents.htm ------ THE LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; OR AN ESSAY ON THE RIGHT OF AUTHORS AND INVENTORS TO A PERPETUAL PROPERTY IN THEIR IDEAS. VOL. I. BY LYSANDER SPOONER. BOSTON: PUBLISHED BY BELA MARSH, 15 FRANKLIN STREET. 1855. CONTENTS OF VOLUME I PART I: NOTE CHAPTER 1. THE LAW OF NATURE, RELATIVE TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION 1. The Right of Property in Ideas to be proved by Analogy. SECTION 2. What is Wealth? SECTION 3. What is Property? SECTION 4. What is the Right of Property? SECTION 5. What Things are Subjects of Properly? SECTION 6. How is the Right of Property Acquired? SECTION 7. What is the Foundation of the Right of Property? SECTION 8. How is the Right of Properly Transferred? SECTION 9. Conclusions from the preceding Principles. CHAPTER II. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED SECTION 1. Objection First SECTION 2. Objection Second SECTION 3. Objection Third SECTION 4. Objection Fourth SECTION 5. Objection Fifth SECTION 6. Objection Sixth SECTION 7. Objection Seventh SECTION 8. Objection Eighth SECTION 9. Objection Ninth SECTION 10. Objection Tenth SECTION 11. Objection Eleventh SECTION 12. Objection Twelfth SECTION 13. Objection Thirteenth SECTION 14. Objection Fourteenth SECTION 15. Objection Fifteenth CHAPTER III. PERPETUITY AND DESCENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION 1. Perpetuity of Intellectual Property SECTION 2. Descent of Intellectual Property CHAPTER IV. THE SALE OF IDEAS CHAPTER V. THE POLICY OF PERPETUITY IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PART II: CHAPTER VI. THE COMMON LAW OF ENGLAND RELATIVE TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION 1. What is the Common Law of England SECTION 2. Why the Common Law Right of Property in Ideas has not been more fully Acknowledged SECTION 3. Review of the Case of Millar v. Taylor SECTION 4. Review of the Case of Donaldson and another, vs. Becket and another ------ regards, alexander. -- "Notwithstanding Jacobsen's confused discussion of unilateral contracts, bilateral contracts, implied licenses, "licenses to the world" and "bare" licenses in his Appellant's Brief, the issue at hand is fairly simple." -- Brief of Appellees (CAFC 2008-1001). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
