More index entries.

diff --git a/freeculture.xml b/freeculture.xml
index 0288c23b555e852fe0fcb0b6d8d44dd3c9808223..39f62086a704f6b7f2235a342bbdf9915197e3a3 100644 (file)
--- a/freeculture.xml
+++ b/freeculture.xml
@@ -3250,6 +3250,7 @@ United Artists Television, Inc.).
 </para></footnote>
 </para>
 </blockquote>
 </para></footnote>
 </para>
 </blockquote>

+<indexterm><primary>Heston, Charlton</primary></indexterm>

 <para>
 These were "free-ride[rs]," Screen Actor's Guild president Charlton
 Heston said, who were "depriving actors of
 <para>
 These were "free-ride[rs]," Screen Actor's Guild president Charlton
 Heston said, who were "depriving actors of


@@ -3257,7 +3258,9 @@ compensation."<footnote><para>
 <!-- f17 -->
 Copyright Law Revision&mdash;CATV, 209 (statement of Charlton Heston,
 president of the Screen Actors Guild).
 <!-- f17 -->
 Copyright Law Revision&mdash;CATV, 209 (statement of Charlton Heston,
 president of the Screen Actors Guild).

-</para></footnote>
+<indexterm><primary>Heston, Charlton</primary></indexterm>
+</para>
+</footnote>

 </para>
 <para>
 But again, there was another side to the debate. As Assistant Attorney
 </para>
 <para>
 But again, there was another side to the debate. As Assistant Attorney


@@ -4408,6 +4411,7 @@ even recognize their source.  I once overheard someone commenting on
 Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Henry V: "I liked it, but Shakespeare
 is so full of clichés."
 </para>
 Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Henry V: "I liked it, but Shakespeare
 is so full of clichés."
 </para>

+<indexterm><primary>Henry V</primary></indexterm>

 <para>
 In 1774, almost 180 years after <citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> was written, the
 "copy-right" for the work was still thought by many to be the exclusive
 <para>
 In 1774, almost 180 years after <citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> was written, the
 "copy-right" for the work was still thought by many to be the exclusive


@@ -4539,41 +4543,35 @@ distribute, the exclusive right to perform, and so on.
 <para>
 So, for example, even if the copyright to Shakespeare's works were
 perpetual, all that would have meant under the original meaning of the
 <para>
 So, for example, even if the copyright to Shakespeare's works were
 perpetual, all that would have meant under the original meaning of the

-term was that no one could reprint Shakespeare's work without the 
-               permission
-of the Shakespeare estate. It would not have controlled 
-               anything,
-for example, about how the work could be performed, whether
+term was that no one could reprint Shakespeare's work without the
+permission of the Shakespeare estate. It would not have controlled
+anything, for example, about how the work could be performed, whether

 the work could be translated, or whether Kenneth Branagh would be
 the work could be translated, or whether Kenneth Branagh would be

-allowed to make his films. The "copy-right" was only an exclusive right
-to print&mdash;no less, of course, but also no more.
+allowed to make his films. The "copy-right" was only an exclusive
+right to print&mdash;no less, of course, but also no more.

 </para>
 <para>
 Even that limited right was viewed with skepticism by the British.
 </para>
 <para>
 Even that limited right was viewed with skepticism by the British.

-They had had a long and ugly experience with "exclusive rights," 
-               especially
-"exclusive rights" granted by the Crown. The English had fought
-a civil war in part about the Crown's practice of handing out 
-               monopolies&mdash;especially
-monopolies for works that already existed. King Henry
-VIII granted a patent to print the Bible and a monopoly to Darcy to
-print playing cards. The English Parliament began to fight back
-against this power of the Crown. In 1656, it passed the Statute of 
-               Monopolies,
-limiting monopolies to patents for new inventions. And by
-1710, Parliament was eager to deal with the growing monopoly in
-publishing.
-</para>
-<para>
-Thus the "copy-right," when viewed as a monopoly right, was 
-               naturally
-viewed as a right that should be limited. (However convincing
-the claim that "it's my property, and I should have it forever," try
+They had had a long and ugly experience with "exclusive rights,"
+especially "exclusive rights" granted by the Crown. The English had
+fought a civil war in part about the Crown's practice of handing out
+monopolies&mdash;especially monopolies for works that already
+existed. King Henry VIII granted a patent to print the Bible and a
+monopoly to Darcy to print playing cards. The English Parliament began
+to fight back against this power of the Crown. In 1656, it passed the
+Statute of Monopolies, limiting monopolies to patents for new
+inventions. And by 1710, Parliament was eager to deal with the growing
+monopoly in publishing.
+</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Henry VIII, King of England</primary></indexterm>
+<para>
+Thus the "copy-right," when viewed as a monopoly right, was naturally
+viewed as a right that should be limited. (However convincing the
+claim that "it's my property, and I should have it forever," try

 sounding convincing when uttering, "It's my monopoly, and I should
 sounding convincing when uttering, "It's my monopoly, and I should

-have it forever.") The state would protect the exclusive right, but only
-so long as it benefited society. The British saw the harms from 
-               specialinterest
-favors; they passed a law to stop them.
+have it forever.") The state would protect the exclusive right, but
+only so long as it benefited society. The British saw the harms from
+specialinterest favors; they passed a law to stop them.

 </para>
 <para>
 Second, about booksellers. It wasn't just that the copyright was a
 </para>
 <para>
 Second, about booksellers. It wasn't just that the copyright was a


@@ -10192,6 +10190,9 @@ success will require.
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 220 -->
 <chapter label="13" id="eldred">
 <title>CHAPTER THIRTEEN: Eldred</title>
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 220 -->
 <chapter label="13" id="eldred">
 <title>CHAPTER THIRTEEN: Eldred</title>

+<indexterm id="idxhawthornenathaniel" class='startofrange'>
+  <primary>Hawthorne, Nathaniel</primary>
+</indexterm>

 <para>
 In 1995, a father was frustrated that his daughters didn't seem to
 like Hawthorne. No doubt there was more than one such father, but at
 <para>
 In 1995, a father was frustrated that his daughters didn't seem to
 like Hawthorne. No doubt there was more than one such father, but at


@@ -10231,6 +10232,7 @@ animated cartoons, sometimes successfully (<citetitle>Cinderella</citetitle>), s
 (<citetitle>The Hunchback of Notre Dame</citetitle>, <citetitle>Treasure Planet</citetitle>). These are all
 commercial publications of public domain works.
 </para>
 (<citetitle>The Hunchback of Notre Dame</citetitle>, <citetitle>Treasure Planet</citetitle>). These are all
 commercial publications of public domain works.
 </para>

+<indexterm startref="idxhawthornenathaniel" class='endofrange'/>

 <para>
 The Internet created the possibility of noncommercial publications of
 public domain works. Eldred's is just one example. There are literally
 <para>
 The Internet created the possibility of noncommercial publications of
 public domain works. Eldred's is just one example. There are literally