Assorted links


If Haiti truly is relatively calm after such a disaster, one theory would be that the current condition just isn't "different enough" from their normal life to cause a large change in individual actions.

Anyone see the latest lies out of the FBI?

1)using the picture of a vocal critic of the GWOT to create a BS Bin Laden photo.

2) Kurt Haskell - Underwear Bomber witness- FBI lying about co-terrorists

The Boston Globe looked at the face of each voter and has alreeady provided a result of the election!!!!! It works.

Regarding No 5 -- Italian is not a dynamic, go gett'em country? Has economic problems? Quelle fromage! I am shocked

"her approval was held up over muck-ups on her taxes."

My dreams are made of Democrats all mucking up their taxes and Republicans filling the no-fly lists.

But Mr. Lellenberg said they all understood the obligation that Holmes represented for their family, ...

Yeah, the Congressional transfer of wealth from Americans to corporations obligation enforced by hordes of lawyers in the name of encouraging Colin Doyle to write from beyond the grave.

Wembley correctly stated the terms for newly produced artistic works. But in the USA, the Holmes stories come under the 1909 copyright act (which applied until 1978).

Under the 1909 act, a literary work got a 28-year term, which could be extended by another 28 years if a renewal was filed. So the total possible term was 56 years. This rule stayed into effect until 1978, and anything published in the USA before the end of 1922 (= 1978 - 56) is in the public domain.

But after 1978 the renewal term was extended, first to 47 years (for a total a 75-year term) and then to 67 years (95 years of total protection).

The vast majority of Holmes stories were published before 1923, and are in the public domain. But a few were published as late as 1927, and those stories are protected in the USA until the end of 2012 (= 1927 + 95).

The Holmes estate, as long as any Sherlock Holmes stories are under US copyright, can file infringement claims for depictions of Holmes that are not straight adaptations of (pre-1923) public domain works featuring the character. So far, most people have decided to pay off the estate rather than pay legal costs to defend their new works as adaptations of the public-domain stories.

I'm not sure what the bit about "recapturing lost rights" refers to. Copyright holders could _not_ regain copyright for works whose terms had expired (as had happened to most of the Holmes stories).

Correction to my previous post: 1927 + 95 = 2022, not 2012.

When the article says Conan Doyle's heirs were able to recapture lost rights, it means the heirs were able to get the copyrights from other entities (publishers, etc.) to which they had been assigned. This did not take works out of the public domain, just changed the ownership of stories still under copyright.

Wow, this post seems like forever ago. Southers declines and DeMint responds sounding like he had real reasons for the hold. That Southers withdrew makes me wonder.

It is difficult to tell from Lowry's description that Klein links to that DeMint had legitimate reasons other than political. For each case she wistfully describes what could have been if the appointment had taken place. All that time lost, all the good that the government could have done with those people hitting the ground running! I kind of hold the opposite view that Lowry unknowingly illustrates in this bit.
He describes how his successor as the ambassador for Venezuela did not arrive until 14 months after he left. "The Venezuelans were furious. They said it -- not publicly -- but they said, 'This is an illustration [that] you don't think we're an important country.' We had to explain to them that this had nothing to do with Venezuela, and everything to do with our confirmation process."

Comments for this post are closed