 |
 |
 |
|
Re: Sunday, August 18, 2002
Lessig specifically advocates for a copyright term of five years with renewable terms of five years for up to 75 years. See "The Future of Ideas", p. 251. But I know that Dave didn't read "The Future of Ideas" because, if he had, he would know that Lessig's arguments are not even close to "missing a lot of substance". BTW, Dave, under original copyright law, your software would not be worthy of copyright protection and, in the event that it was, you would have been able to renew it for another 14 years in April. Of course, Lessig mentions all of this in both of his books, in his briefs to the court, numerous law review articles, etc. that Dave failed to read. Further, why would if matter if Lessig studied commercial software (he did) or not? If he didn't, does this make him "unqualified" in some way, then? If so, similarly, one could ask if Dave studied the law. Since Dave did not, does this make Dave "unqualified" in legal matters? The answer is "no" in either case. FWIW, I don't think Lessig and Dave see things the same way and there's nothing wrong with that. Lessig is coming into the arena from a legal perspective. He's saying, "Look, all you developers, open source or commercial, you better start organizing POLITICALLY, or your technical genius is going to be neutered by politicians opposed to you." There are responses to this message:
|
