Quote:
Originally Posted by bhartman36
I'm not saying one is just as serious as the other. Obviously, child molestation is much more detestable. The point I was making is that "some people" not thinking it is wrong is a meaningless standard. The whole reason we have a representative republic is that laws are based on the majority (whether it's the majority of citizens or representatives). The fact that "some people" think a law is wrong doesn't give anyone the right to flip the law the bird. And in the United States, we've been in agreement that intellectual property should be protected since ~ 1793.
|
You've been
in agreement that it should be a fixed-term, shortish thing. The extensions to 40 years, 50, 70, life+70 are all later additions that were hardly thought necessary, or beneficial to society as a whole, by the guys who first wrote it. The difference between what, 20 years, and life+50 or 70 is rather large, wouldn't you say?
The U.S. Congress first exercised its power to enact copyright legislation with the Copyright Act of 1790. The Act secured an author the exclusive right to publish and vend "maps, charts and books" for a term of 14 years, with the right of renewal for one additional 14 year term if the author was still alive.
Also, while "some people" doens't constitute a reason to change, unenforced laws generally tend to die. Furthermore, there's the "change of attitude" thing that can be long in coming (see MLK).
Exceptions happen, and things change.