said by Mashiki :

It took 5 weeks to get into see my family doctor that's the legacy of universal healthcare.

said by Mashiki :

By-the-by and going back to topic, I'd suggest going for a CD levy down there.

said by Kearnstd :

well the family should get a fscking job. why should progress be stopped so the Estate can get free money for the next 75 years.

i pirate music by dead artists without any guilt, they are dead so what does it matter.

said by major marco :

Yes, it is a concern of mine. As a photographer, I've had my images used by Big Bu$ine$$ but never received a dime for the publication despite my copyright. Where is MY U.S. government assigned/taxpayer financed private police force to enforce MY copyright? I would like the feebs to protect my Intellectual Property rights, after all, my images contribute to the economy in that monies received enable me to spend locally as well as nationally. My side photography business is good for the economy, but the feebs won't help me. Just the **AAs.

said by Mactron :

WoW some common sense from the Bush Whitehouse ?.. :o ;)

said by major marco :

Where is MY U.S. government assigned/taxpayer financed private police force to enforce MY copyright?

said by openbox9 :

IP is a concern for more than just the RIAA. Take your blinders off and expand your vision a little.

said by jc100 :

When Democrats are in, both go down. Strange, ay =).

said by jc100 :

Here's where you are wrong TK.. Are you ever Right (nope)?. Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that... (snip)

said by TKJunkMail :

But that is the attitude of so many of the slackers that now are in school or unemployed. Just give up; watch videos on the internet or listen to the stolen music on their iPods.

said by TKJunkMail :

You are commenting on the governments ability to do a GOOD job. NOT on their responsibility to do the job at all. The job needs doing. It just needs to be done better. Maybe the new law will help them do that.

said by openbox9 :

Following on your auto dealership example, does the owner of the dealership have authority to pursue and punish a perpetrator that takes one of his/her vehicles without permission? No, that's what law enforcement is for.

said by Kearnstd :

American laws are way way too strong atm though. it is totally unreasonable that current copyrights last nearly 100 years after the death of the artist. i could support Copyright more if it lasted say only 15-20 years from the creation of the media. in other words making it more similar to a drug patent.

said by TKJunkMail :

The corpse doesn't. The ESTATE of the corpse does.

said by jc100 :

Here's where you are wrong TK.. Are you ever Right (nope)?. Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that...

said by Kearnstd :

we are probally one of the few countries in which a Corpse gets royalties for 75 years.

said by TKJunkMail :

And the education part is to get them(countries) to strengthen their laws and show that it is often in their own intellectual property industries interests to do so and that reciprocity benefits all.

said by pandora :

That will stop it from passing for four or five months. Is there a position on this bill by Senator Obama or Senator McCain?

said by jc100 :

This time from the Democrats. Usually, it's been from the far right, but the left is starting their own stupidity.

said by TKJunkMail :

Bush White House threatened a veto if that part of the act wasn't removed from the bill.
»blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/0···tra.html

said by openbox9 :

The US wasn't founded on the attitude of "hey, I didn't do it right the first time so I'm going to give up". But then again, maybe that attitude has allowed our country to get where it is today.

said by jc100 :

If you owned 10 car lots in 10 states, SHOULD TAX PAYERS cover the cost of stationing a 24/7 police officer there to make sure you CARS ARE NOT STOLEN. After all, your business HELPS the economy too.

said by jc100 :

So let's see. If you can't do it right, you should still try anyway?

said by jc100 :

It protects PRIVATE CORPORATE interests ... WHY SHOULD MY MONEY be spent to ensure PRIVATE interests.

said by TKJunkMail :

And the education part is to get them(countries) to strengthen their laws and show that it is often in their own intellectual property industries interests to do so and that reciprocity benefits all.

said by Nightshade :

Even if the foreign laws of intellectual property rights are different than US Laws?

Tell me TK are they gonna teach foreign companies US law or their own laws? If that's the case what laws are going to be more supreme, the laws of the US or the laws of the foreign country that the US companies choose to do business in?

I think foreign countries know their laws pretty well. After all, they did pass them. The last thing any foreign country want is some other country coming in and training them what the foreign country's laws are and it should be done their way. Many countries would consider that a threat of their sovereignty.

said by TKJunkMail :

Yes, train other countries. Because it helps to get foreign countries to enforce laws protecting "intellectual property" rights of US companies and helps protect a large part of US exports.

said by bear73 :

While i agree with you TK that GOVT has the responsibility I have little faith that this new bill will actually result in them DOING a good job. IF there were bigger penalties for those in Congress, Judicial, and enforcement then I might have some faith. But until you see them held to the same standards that our military is held to (98% do The Right Thing and are held to it)then nothing will change. And onestly its do to a degradation of the morals of society. Things that are acceptable to the majority today would not have been tolerated 50 years ago.

said by TKJunkMail :

The gov't isn't protecting RIAA. It is protecting "intellectual property" rights of many industries. And "intellectual property" makes up a larger and larger part of the US GDP and an even larger part of our exports.

said by JSM88 :

Nice try, but that had nothing to do with the provision being dropped - the Democratic controlled Senate Judiciary committee couldn't care less about what the Bush Administration wanted. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Author of the Internet Tax ban, Section 230 of the CDA, Net Neutrality and Net radio champion, held up the bill until that section was removed. There are actually good sections of the bill (basically focused on preventing dangerous counterfeits of physical goods) but the civil enforcement provision would have been a disaster for the Internet.

It's nice how TK wants to claim credit for the Republicans, but unless they actually went and hit someone with that letter they sent, the Bush administration had about as much impact on this issue as an arthritic chicken.

said by Dogfather :

Oh yeah, our EXPLODING trade deficit and decimation of our manufacturing sectors through outsourcing is proof the Federal gov't is protecting the US economy.

What horsecrap.

said by jc100 :

Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that.

said by Dogfather :

The whole bill should have been vetoed. We don't need bigger gov't to service as private police for racketeers like the RIAA.

said by DrModem :

Train other countries?!

WTFriggingheck?