tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254466597958912432.post5495859602957065085..comments2023-06-08T02:40:03.761-06:00Comments on Tea and High Scores: Uncited sensationalismDaniel Monetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17709023704310238201noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254466597958912432.post-81555179563465771482008-06-11T21:58:00.000-06:002008-06-11T21:58:00.000-06:00OMG WHAR BLOG.OMG WHAR BLOG.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254466597958912432.post-80703714871950013692008-04-17T14:50:00.000-06:002008-04-17T14:50:00.000-06:00Your link's dead, dude.For the record, thomas sear...<I>Your link's dead, dude.</I><BR/><BR/>For the record, thomas search results aren't permalinks, they time *very* quickly. It's quite shady.Capt. Jean-Luc Pikachuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07080616224347162571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254466597958912432.post-17440918933135852162008-04-16T16:55:00.000-06:002008-04-16T16:55:00.000-06:00Your link's dead, dude. Despite that, a search run...Your link's dead, dude. <BR/>Despite that, a search run in the 109th Congress for bills pertaining to Title 17, then a search run on the results page that gives for "Orphan Work," gave me the full text of the bill.<BR/>Now, my legalese isn't the greatest, but it looks to me like if someone "creates a new work" from an infringed work - say, traces it and adds flourishes - they can use that as much as they want. <BR/>Considering that's still the case, not too scary. What interests me in that particular paragraph is that they still have to pay for it, which (if my understanding is correct) is not the case now.<BR/>This isn't <I>all</I> bad.<BR/>It's still pretty bad.<BR/>I still hope it never happens. ^^Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com