[schex86]

There can be no perfect written representation of the will of the people.

The written word is imprecise and is written by imprecise and imperfect people.

Remember, the Constitution of Japan was ratified by the people too but it was written by the USA and the Japanese were literally held to gun point to ratify it. Would you also say that it is the perfect representation of the will of the people simply because the people ratified it? Pretty much the same goes for Iraq now too, though of course it was done much more subtly this time.

Note the use of the qualifier "most", as in most perfect, or better yet mostly perfect. Once you take this into account, the rest of your statement/s are rendered irrelevant.

Also note, the US Constitution was ratified by the people of their own free will, resulting in your comparisons with Japan and Iraq as, strangely, irrelevant.

But here's something for you to try: Conduct a poll of US Citizens and ask them if they feel the Constitution represents the will of the people. I predict the results in the affirmative will constitute a very high percentage. If you tried this in Japan and Iraq, maybe not so much...

Hmm, could this be the lynchpin to establishing a successful copyright based business model, as opposed to the copyright based business bubble currently being inflated??

Seriously though, I agree many laws, including copyright ones, have been co-opted by lobby groups for the benefit of a few.

I agree with your agreement. This co-opting has been exploited to the point where a serious imbalance now exists in the current social contract for copyright. The rights and authorities of a privileged few grow ever more abrasive and demanding, while the natural Liberties of the people are dismissed and even classified as high crimes (or high-sea crimes, take your pick).

Copyright, as was envisioned by the founders, was instituted to benefit all, not a few. The currently undesirable status quo must change, and change dramatically, as that original intent of the founders as ratified by the people, was long ago swept under the rug by those fearing their fate at the hands of the free market.

Not the same people. Only some of the same people. Some others who were different and thus their defitions, thoughts and feelings on the matter would have been different.

It sounds to me like you've haven't worked on a large project where the various tasks were meted out to various teams and committees. Is it, then, possible that those few responsible for the language of the Copyright Clause in the Constitution, may also have been included on the Legislative Committee that drafted the 1790 Copyright Act? Sounds like a homework project.

Regardless, my original statement still stands. Or is the annual Disney ad infinitum copyright renewal program somehow a better representation of founders' intent? Or are they, as you seem to be implying, exactly the same in this respect?

Further, those men, believe it or not, were not perfect. Neither were the constituents that made up the USA at the time. Ergo, the Constitution can not possibly be a perfect representation of the will of the people

Oh, I never knew those Men weren't Perfect. Thanks for informing me. And the People weren't Perfect either??! I would have never guessed.

But this is also irrelevant, since it has nothing to do with whether or not the Constitution most closely represents their Will. Remember, the Constitution represents a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.

It does not represent your concept of Perfection. Whatever that might be, it is, shall I say, irrelevant.

And lets just say, for the sake of it, the USA Constitution is as close to perfect as we could hope. For you to believe this to be so because it was "ratified by the people", you must believe in the democratic process. Why do you believe the democratic process would be any more workable then than now? Remember, it is a process of the people and people were just as flawed then as they are now.

And I do say so! It as close to perfectly representing the will of the People as any written document can be, and not necessarily for my sake, but that of the People, as I respect THEIR authority on the matter, and none other.

And there is a democratic process to resolve issues in which one side has exploited the current system and created a great injustice that must be rectified. This process is called Amending the Constitution, and its end result is that the will of the People is made known, without equivocation, without loopholes, without bubbles, without any doubt.

When the will of the People is finally returned to its rightful stature in the social contract of copyright, then will the People be invested in it, then will the People accept it, then will the People support it.

Until then, you have nothing more than Unrighteous Dominion.

Interesting but not relevant to the discussion at hand.

You're the one asking for basis-es and credentials, so if its not relevant then you're to blame, since I was only attempting to answer your oft repeated question.