Software Industry Brainwashing kids to observe copyrights

Laws that prevent infringement of copyrights deserve protection, but copyrightowners are becoming insane. The November 26 edition of Forbes, page 54, mentions how the Entertainment Software Association has prepared a package of materials for kindergartners to teach them the evils of copyright infringement, including activity pages directing kids to draw a line to the copyrighted object. Well I suppose if adult copyright lawyers use crayons to explain the idea/expression dichotomy, why not reach out to the crayon experts? I mean, are these 5-year-olds given extra points if they draw the lines to the part of objects that are protected by 17 USC 102(a) but not 102(b)? Do 5 years old understand the difference between Due Process vagueness, and Do-Poo-Poo Nappiness? What next, brand "102(a)" onto the feets of all newborne babies? Think of this silly law: "Copyright law and 5 year olds."

*******

and welcome visitors from these inventive blogs: kraynov.com Uncommon maulnet.ru homelessinmoscow.blogspot.com http://searchengines.ru/blog/ homelessinizhevsk.blogspot.com artyom-maynas.blogspot.com arn.ro spryt.ru anticorporativ.ru volinrok.com mastertext.spb.ru kopernik.name brokenbrake.biz z.codeby.net homelessin.blogspot.com smopro.ru problogging.ru ruseosmo.blogspot.com homebusiness.ru blog.micromarketing.ru

HILARY CLINTON AND JACK NICHOLSON

Departing from my usual analysis of technological advances and intellectual property, there is an equally captivating moment, similar to claims language used by patent boutiques and examiners. IF YOU LOVE HILARY CLINTON AND JACK NICHOLSON: For those of you who love Jack Nicholson's climatic scene in the movie "A Few Good Men" - the "You Want the Truth?" scene, and if you love Hilary Clinton, you will love the following humor written by New York Times op-ed writer David Brooks: BRIAN WILLIAMS: ... Senator Clinton, which issue would you like to obfuscate next? CLINTON: Obfuscate? Son, let me tell you the truth, because you can't handle the truth. We live in a world with enemies. We fight elections where people play rough. Who's going to do it? These two pretty boys? The left-wing nutjobs in our party who sit around watching Bill Maher? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, leads to victory. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about in Santa Monica dinner parties, you want me at that podium. You need me at that podium. And I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to the self-righteous liberals who rise and sleep under the very blanket of the victory I provide! I wish you'd just said thanks and went on your way. In any case, I don't give a damn what answers you think you're entitled to!

UK rejects technical patent/Traffic light patent history

MORE "TECHNICAL" LIES FROM THE UK PATENT OFFICE: (www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/23/uk_patent_system_a_joke)

The Register (UK) has a new story about how the UK Patent Office revoked a patent for electronically processing tips on restaurant bills, ruling that the invention was "technical", WITHOUT ONCE AGAIN WHAT THE BLOODY HECK THEY MEAN BY "TECHNICAL". Maybe the UK PO should use crayons for their logical reasoning. The inventor is upset because he had spent 100,000 pounds defending the patent, and then had to sell the patent to a patent broker. Well, you are fool if you spend so much money on an such patent in the UK.

PATENT DEAL BETWEEN GE AND AFRICAN AMERICAN INVENTOR

Wired Magazine online has a brief historical inventor news item. In 1923, African American inventor Garrett Morgan gets a patent on a three-section traffic light, which so interests General Electric that they pay Morgan $40,000 for his patent (which inflation-adjusted was good money back then.) GE goes onto to monopolize the traffic signal business for awhile.