Disney actually had "The Jungle Book" competed early, but were just waiting for it to enter public domain before announcing its release

Though it would be far from flawless, such a feature would be useful due to this incident http://www.gamespot.com/news/texas-teen-jailed-after-league-of-legends-argument-6410871

Just wait till 2017 and 2018. Disney will be dumping millions of dollars into congress for another perpetual extension of copyright terms.

I really wish we had a "Use it or Lose it" clause in our copyright laws. After X number of years of the product not being marketed, it falls into public domain. Software for even shorter periods.

Committing treason against a corrupt government vs. treason against your country can be seen differently by the people. Though he did break the law, many people see him as a hero. Think of it. It took acts of treason against a government that was suppressing and refusing to listen to our people for us to become the country we now are. Maybe this is the first step towards another revolution.

If he wants back in, get some cosmetic surgery, contact lenses, go bald and new style or no facial hair. After which, cross our unprotected southern borders, choose a new name, get a fake ID on the black market, stay low for awhile and slowly merge into society again and keep a low profile.

I say whistleblower. He exposed the wrong doing of the NSA, but instead of the government following the law of the whistleblower protection act, they charge him with espionage. Unfortunately the Patriot Act is what makes all these actions legal. Well, I believe the Patriot Act itself is illegal/unconstitutional. Powers granted to the government by the patriot act requires a constitutional amendments, not acts or bills. "Easiest way for tyranny to take root is when people of good conscience remain silent." -Thomas Jefferson Edward Snowden believed this. He saw the dangerous path our government is dragging this country down. We need more people with courage like his.

I say that if they claim the patent/all rights/ownership of this virus, then should they be held liable for the deaths caused by " their" virus?

wasn't there already a case in which being forced to decrypt one's hard drives was deemed self-incrimination?

This is why patent laws should be reformed to specify that a patent applies to something that was invented/created by a person(s) or company, not discovered.

What I was refering to is that with the IRS targeting many conservative groups or groups pushing for less government and how further investigations are finding all three branches are involved. and what's wrong with speculation?

and how will this policy be enforced or even forcible when a game is sold at a yard sale from one user directly to another?

Considering recent events, I bet if this concerned a liberal instead of a libertarian, ICE would seize the domain a declare it as belonging to that liberal politician and the justices would turn a blind eye on it.

It take to patentee to file the patent but then the USPTO to grant the patent and those involved in granting this patent need to be fired for their incompetence. Characachers have been around for a long time and I have seen booths at arcades and Dave & Busters that do exactly this since the late 90s. This is beyond obvious prior art.

WooHoo! What I wish patent limitations here would be is 1) must be a tangible inventions (in other words, no software, business models, etc. Must have physical form) 2) Must be something that was invented and not simply discovered. ( no patenting of genes) 3) The person(s) or company that filed the patent must be a practicing entity ( R&D, manufacturing and marketing of that invention must be conducted otherwise the patent will be voided) 4) Patents must be specific to the invention (in simplest terms, meaning that invention 10 + 10 =20 would not be a violation of invention 4 * 5 =20 patent) 5) Patent refers to the specifics of the final product only( the final product of a genetically engineered seed and not just a strand of its DNA. meaning that cross-pollenization and hybridization conducted by nature that creates a new seed that contains that gene does not violate the patent. Up yours Monsanto!!)