🚀 go-pugleaf

The April 30 issue of Time had an interesting article on copyright law
and how it applies to unpublished works such as the letters of famous
people to lovers and friends. The last paragraph-and-a-half caught my eye:

"...Owning a copyright is not the same as owning a house. In order to
encourage creativity, Congress granted long-lasting copyright
monopolies (currently 50 years after the death of the author); but the
law is also intended to promote the public good by disseminating art
and knowledge through secondary uses.

  "Including unpublished material in the fair use section of the
copright law would expand this utilitarian view, which received an
eloquent boost in last month's Harvard Law Review by Judge Pierre N.
Leval of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
York. `All intellectual creative activity is in part derivative,'
said Leval, who made no brief for the pending legislation. `There is
no such thing as a wholly original thought or invention. Each advance
stands on building blocks fashioned by prior thinkers.'"

Tim Moore                     moore@cs.utah.edu {bellcore,hplabs}!utah-cs!moore
"Ah, youth. Ah, statute of limitations."
		-John Waters