RSSMicro.com Search - RSS Feed Search Engine - RSS Feed Directory
Dedicated RSS Feed Search Engine
 Search 2.1 million RSS feeds
The most comprehensive RSS feed search on the web
Top Stories  |  FeedRank Checker

Published

   Last Hour

   Last Day

   Past Week

   Past Month

 Anytime







Featured
RSS Feeds


CNN RSS Feeds

Reuters RSS Feeds

MSNBC RSS Feeds

New York Times RSS Feeds

Washington Post RSS Feeds

CNBC RSS Feeds

ABC News RSS Feeds

Fox News RSS Feeds

Sky News RSS Feeds

Forbes RSS Feeds

CNET RSS Feeds

Unicef RSS Feeds

PBS RSS Feeds

Wall Street Journal RSS Feeds

Financial Times RSS Feeds

Business Week RSS Feeds

Bloomberg RSS Feeds

TheStreet RSS Feeds

ESPN RSS Feeds

   


Calculate your site FeedRank Today

FeedRank - RSSMicro Search

FeedRank, a newly developed algorithm for ranking RSS feeds only on RSSMicro
Click here to learn more


Techdirt


FeedRank: 5/10  5/10  Good  ---  www.techdirt.com
Easily digestible tech news... ...

 

 
Tuesday, May 13, 2008 --- 73 days ago
And here's another fun copyright mystery from William Patry: it turns out that some courts have constructed a rather convoluted rationale for how you can still be found to be infringing copyrights, even on material that everyone admits is public domain . While it's rare, he cites two such cases, suggesting that both have rather tortured logic behind them. The first involves a play which was later turned into a movie. While the play remained under copyright, the separate copyright of the movie was not renewed in a timely manner, allowing it to fall into the public domain. Yet, because of the remaining copyright on the play, a court determined that the movie could not be distributed, since it retained some elements directly from the play. Even if you can sort of understand the reasoning for that one, it's hard to figure out the reasoning behind the second case. In this one, a bunch of episodes from "The Andy Griffith" show fell into the public domain. However, it was just a bunch of episodes from later seasons. Earlier seasons remained under copyright. The court ruled that since the later shows were based on the earlier shows that were still covered by copyright, the later shows could not be distributed freely. This seems like a rather perverse interpretation of copyright law. But, of course, when you have people viewing copyrights not as an incentive to create, but as a kind of "property" over which you have tota ...




Recent Posts





 Facebook     Del.icio.us     Digg     StumbleUpon     Reddit     Google
Copyright © 2008 RSSMicro.com