Yes, because, classics, by definition, have been around for a while and have made it into school curricula, hence everybody, regardless of their erudition level, has heard of them. I don't remember studying Betty Smith in school. Maybe 100 years from now she will be a classic, but as of now, she is not.

I think these guys have a skewed idea of what exactly is a classic. Shakespeare is a classic. Betty Smith is just some lady I never heard of, who, I'm guessing, grew up in Brooklyn.

Oh, no, she superpoked DickCheney!

Tenuous is the understatement of the century. I am not a lawyer, but I find it hard to believe there is anything in trademark law that grants such broad rights (on any combination of two words with initials F and B). If it does, I guess Microsoft owns My Wiener.

I wouldn't like it at all, if the price is having no health care coverage.

And I am saying that since they are already doing us a favor, by acting as human lab rats, they should not have to pay a dime and society (the rest of us) should pick up the tab.

So, you are saying that the only people who should pay for cancer research are the ones unfortunate enough to get it? Nice.

My landlord had a car accident and needed about $7,000 worth of physical therapy. The insurance company refused to pay that until the lawyers got involved. I seriously doubt they would even consider paying $100k without going to court first.

Logic. Read it. Live it.

well, secret arrests are marginally better than lynching.

Maybe theirs is one of the 60% that don't have to be landscaped with live plants.

Yes. It's called Google Scholar

If so, then it will be ready when pigs reach low Earth orbit. However, I think they are going for cheap and fast.

I think he is thinking of the Berne convention, since this discussion is supposed to be about copyright law.

Cheap, fast, safe: pick any two.