X-Git-Url: https://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/text-free-culture-lessig.git/blobdiff_plain/fd512c6922e9f7c0e684cc3ab48c686a19eb505a..cc21eebc3e7226c8f50b9932927ffefff112b484:/freeculture.xml diff --git a/freeculture.xml b/freeculture.xml index f7fb5d0..ee891aa 100644 --- a/freeculture.xml +++ b/freeculture.xml @@ -3140,7 +3140,7 @@ composer and publisher without any regard for [their] rights. To Amend and Consolidate the Acts Respecting Copyright: Hearings on -S. 6330 and H.R. 19853 Before the ( Joint) Committees on Patents, 59th +S. 6330 and H.R. 19853 Before the (Joint) Committees on Patents, 59th Cong. 59, 1st sess. (1906) (statement of Senator Alfred B. Kittredge, of South Dakota, chairman), reprinted in Legislative History of the Copyright Act, E. Fulton Brylawski and Abe Goldman, eds. (South @@ -3258,7 +3258,7 @@ creativity. Copyright Law Revision: Hearings on S. 2499, S. 2900, H.R. 243, and -H.R. 11794 Before the ( Joint) Committee on Patents, 60th Cong., 1st +H.R. 11794 Before the (Joint) Committee on Patents, 60th Cong., 1st sess., 217 (1908) (statement of Senator Reed Smoot, chairman), reprinted in Legislative History of the 1909 Copyright Act, E. Fulton Brylawski and Abe Goldman, eds. (South Hackensack, N.J.: Rothman Reprints, 1976). @@ -6026,7 +6026,7 @@ all—in the library archive of the film company. Doug Herrick, Toward a National Film Collection: Motion Pictures at the Library of Congress, Film Library Quarterly 13 nos. 2–3 (1980): 5; Anthony Slide, Nitrate Won't Wait: A History of Film -Preservation in the United States ( Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & +Preservation in the United States (Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., 1992), 36. @@ -9184,19 +9184,23 @@ We achieved that free culture because our law respected important limits on the scope of the interests protected by property. The very birth of copyright as a statutory right recognized those limits, by granting copyright owners protection for a limited time only (the -story of chapter 6). The tradition of fair use is animated by a -similar concern that is increasingly under strain as the costs of -exercising any fair use right become unavoidably high (the story of -chapter 7). Adding +story of chapter ). The tradition of fair use is +animated by a similar concern that is increasingly under strain as the +costs of exercising any fair use right become unavoidably high (the +story of chapter ). Adding statutory rights where markets might stifle innovation is another -familiar limit on the property right that copyright is (chapter -8). And granting archives and libraries a broad freedom to collect, -claims of property notwithstanding, is a crucial part of guaranteeing -the soul of a culture (chapter 9). Free cultures, like free markets, -are built with property. But the nature of the property that builds a -free culture is very different from the extremist vision that -dominates the debate today. +familiar limit on the property right that copyright is (chapter ). And +granting archives and libraries a broad freedom to collect, claims of +property notwithstanding, is a crucial part of guaranteeing the soul +of a culture (chapter ). Free cultures, like free markets, are built +with property. But the nature of the property that builds a free +culture is very different from the extremist vision that dominates the +debate today. Free culture is increasingly the casualty in this war on piracy. In @@ -9597,11 +9601,12 @@ examples of extreme penalties for vague infringements continue to proliferate. It is impossible to get a clear sense of what's allowed and what's not, and at the same time, the penalties for crossing the line are astonishingly harsh. The four students who were threatened -by the RIAA ( Jesse Jordan of chapter 3 was just one) were threatened -with a $98 billion lawsuit for building search engines that permitted -songs to be copied. Yet World-Com—which defrauded investors of -$11 billion, resulting in a loss to investors in market capitalization -of over $200 billion—received a fine of a mere $750 +by the RIAA (Jesse Jordan of chapter was just one) were threatened with a +$98 billion lawsuit for building search engines that permitted songs +to be copied. Yet World-Com—which defrauded investors of $11 +billion, resulting in a loss to investors in market capitalization of +over $200 billion—received a fine of a mere $750 million. See Lynne W. Jeter, Disconnected: Deceit and Betrayal at WorldCom