![]() |
Eldred vs. Ashcroft fails in SCOTUS
Not that I truly expected differently, but <a href="http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SCOTUS_COPYRIGHTS?SITE=COFOR&SECTION=HOME">the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act</a> just got upheld by the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 vote. ARRRRRRRRRRGH!
Disney (and corporations of its ilk) 1, Public Domain 0. <a href="http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020305_sprigman.html">A few notes as to why this was important.</a> |
And that's a final score, as there ain't no more appeals. Oh well.
Anyway, this is the end of any chance for copyright law to have any legitimacy. Now it's just a nasty form of corporate welfare. (and, of course, censorship). Anyone have a digitized copy of "Steamboat Willie"? In honor of this decision I'd like to put it up on my web site for as long as it takes Disney to notice it. |
Quote:
http://randomfoo.net/oscon/2002/lessig/ |
More proof that corporations are completely amoral.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'm curious.. does being amoral mean that you're immoral? I suppose it should, since not caring about the (moral) rules doesn't mean they don't apply to you. But if you ignore the existance of said rules, then from your perspective, you don't even believe in evil and thus cannot be evil.
Just trying to figure out if I can get away with going around calling corporations evil or not. It sure would be fulfilling, but then again I'd hate to be called on it and be wrong. |
I believe in this context "amoral" means that their actions are not influenced by any moral code.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.