LINKS - NEWS & POLITICAL COMMENTARY August 02, 2005 9:08 PM
Georgia L.'s Network Subject: My Friend's Website
Message: Hi to all my friends both old and new! I have a link to a website belonging to a friend and member of my care2 network. He works hard supporting our liberal causes so I hope you stop by and take a look. It also contains links to about every interesting blog and news source on the net. If you like it please pass it on to your network! His nic here is Ozy Mandias and he is in my friends list. Peace and Hugs, Georgia
Frantz Mfg. Co. v. Phenix Mfg. Co., 457 F.2d 314, 327 n.48 (7th Cir. 1972) (emphasis added)(quoting Lee v. Runge, 404 U.S. 887, 890 (1971) (Douglas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari)).
The Seventh Circuit, etc...
The court held, by “focus[ing] on how well the test promotes the primary objective of the Act. This objective is not to reward an author for her labors, but ‘to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.’”Erickson v. Trinity Theatre, 13 F.3d 1061, 1069 (7th Cir. 1994). See also J.L. Mott Iron Works v. Clow, 82 F. 316, 320 (7th Cir. 1897) (“Under the constitution, the power lodged with congress is not unlimited, but is restricted to the promotion of the progress of science and useful arts.”).
The Ninth Circuit, etc...
In Aalmuhammed v. Lee, 202 F.3d 1227, 1235 (9th Cir. 1999), “[t]he Constitution establishes the social policy that our construction of the statutory term ‘authors’ carries out. The Founding Fathers gave Congress the power to give authors copyrights in order ‘to promote the progress of Science and useful arts.’”
The Second Circuit,etc...
[the] purpose [‘to promote the Progress of Science’], ‘courts in passing upon particular claims of infringement must occasionally subordinate the copyright holder’s interest in a maximum financial return to the greater public interest in the development of art, science, and industry.’” Rosemont Enter. Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 307 (2d Cir. 1966)(citing Berlin v. E.C. Publs., 329 F.2d 541, 544 (2d Cir. 1964) (Kaufman, J.)).
I still have not found a 'Constitutional Amendment' stating that the 'Owner' ( Not Author) of a Copyrighted work should be protected, but they seem to be the only ones that are.
'Works' made for hire have a longer Protection than the creative works of the Authors and Inventors. Why is this? This promotes 'Big Business', not the Arts and Sciences. Infringement in my opinion, stems from this type of greed.
If a Corporation is Infringing instead of Inventing, how does this 'Promote Progress' when it makes it 'unsafe' for the Talented to use their skills.
Sarah Palin's Links to Witch Hunting! September 21, 2008 7:49 AM
VIDEO: Sarah Palin's Witch Hunting Pastor
Alaska Progressive radio host Shannyn Moore talks with Countdown's Keith Olbermann about the recent revelation that Pastor Thomas Muthee, a witch hunter, delivered 10 sermons about his exploits at Sarah Palin's church, the Wasilla Assembly of God, in 2005