Comments on: Updates: Mark Helprin, Scribd lawsuit http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/updates-mark-helprin-scribd-lawsuit/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:55:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Brian O'Leary http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/updates-mark-helprin-scribd-lawsuit/comment-page-1/#comment-1145532 Brian O'Leary Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:18:36 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/09/23/updates-mark-helprin-scribd-lawsuit/#comment-1145532 A little more forethought might have helped avoid the Scribd lawsuit. I suggested that the author could have started by asking three questions http://bit.ly/2t007l A little more forethought might have helped avoid the Scribd lawsuit. I suggested that the author could have started by asking three questions http://bit.ly/2t007l

]]> By: Bill McHale http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/updates-mark-helprin-scribd-lawsuit/comment-page-1/#comment-1145516 Bill McHale Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:44:34 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/09/23/updates-mark-helprin-scribd-lawsuit/#comment-1145516 I think Mr. Helprin is something of a lawyer about his originalist position. He would have no problem with copyrights that extended 2000 years, but since that is a limited time, then it clearly falls within the intentions of the founders -- this despite the fact that I suspect that Madison, Hamilton and the other framers of the Constitution would have been horrified by the notion of copyrights lasting so long. Of course, most of us realize that whether one claims to be an originalist or a believer in a living Constitution, one generally finds a way to twist that framework into the position one takes. It seems to me, that Mr. Helprin has become so sure of his own intellectual superiority that he has fallen into the trap of believing that using his over-extended vocabulary is all that it should take to sway the more intelligent amongst his readers to his position. As for the rest? Well apparently their opinions have been irredeemably corrupted by various types of digital media around us. Mr. Helprin attempts to channel the late William F. Buckley but he fails to remember that Mr. Buckley, though in love of big words himself, never used them with the obvious, though denied malice of Mr. Helprin and always in the service of a rigorously argued position. One last thought, he seems to believe that those who are against extending copyright right are somehow against the rights of the individual. He seems to forget that every right of one individual constrains the rights of other individuals. Over extended copyright not only serves no purpose other than to continue to enrich those who had nothing to do with the work copyrighted, but it also limits the ability of individuals to make use of that work in wonderful ways. -- Bill I think Mr. Helprin is something of a lawyer about his originalist position. He would have no problem with copyrights that extended 2000 years, but since that is a limited time, then it clearly falls within the intentions of the founders — this despite the fact that I suspect that Madison, Hamilton and the other framers of the Constitution would have been horrified by the notion of copyrights lasting so long. Of course, most of us realize that whether one claims to be an originalist or a believer in a living Constitution, one generally finds a way to twist that framework into the position one takes.

It seems to me, that Mr. Helprin has become so sure of his own intellectual superiority that he has fallen into the trap of believing that using his over-extended vocabulary is all that it should take to sway the more intelligent amongst his readers to his position. As for the rest? Well apparently their opinions have been irredeemably corrupted by various types of digital media around us. Mr. Helprin attempts to channel the late William F. Buckley but he fails to remember that Mr. Buckley, though in love of big words himself, never used them with the obvious, though denied malice of Mr. Helprin and always in the service of a rigorously argued position.

One last thought, he seems to believe that those who are against extending copyright right are somehow against the rights of the individual. He seems to forget that every right of one individual constrains the rights of other individuals. Over extended copyright not only serves no purpose other than to continue to enrich those who had nothing to do with the work copyrighted, but it also limits the ability of individuals to make use of that work in wonderful ways.

–
Bill

]]>