Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
The copyright is not the length of the copyright. But, of course the length is determined by reference to the life of the original author. It is neither a right nor an obligation. It simply determines how long the copyright lasts. When an author or other owner transfers all of their rights pursuant to the copyright it effectively transfers the copyright itself. They have no interest left, though the duration of copyright still depends upon the length of their lives.
@pwalker8. Of course there is sometimes doubt in precedents, just as there is in interpreting legislation. I would suggest that you read some basic legal textbooks covering the doctrine of precedent. Lawyers of course seek to "distinguish" their client's case from an unfavourable precedent, just as they seek to argue that unfavourable legislation does not apply or does not operate in that way. A huge amount of legislation applied to contracts. In the US the various commercial codes alone make huge changes. Common law and precedent does of course continue to play a role. But interpretation of precedent in general is no more uncertain or inconsistent than interpreting legislation. In fact, the rules for interpreting legislation are arguably a good deal more complex than the doctrine of precedent. An appeal to authority based on your memory of sn unspecified introductory contract case or in fact any introductory contract class is of no value.
|
Sigh. Whatever. There is a lot of difference between reality and what you read on the internet. I'm a lot more willing to believe what my sister, the trial lawyer tells me and what I was taught in class by lawyers practicing in the US than what you tell me you think that US law ought to be.