"If society doesn't reward people for their time, they're going to stop doing it." You know, people created voluminous works of creativity before the invention of copyright.

The reason the differences from the Jackson films vs the books don't bother me, is that these are tales from a legendarium as Tolkien called it. To be told and retold, as legends are. He retold many of the stories in various formats, and with variations in the stories. So for me the movies are just a variation on the war of the ring legend, and for the most part damn good.

The problem lies in allowing our government to have discretion over what's considered artistic or scientific. Clearly these are not areas in which the government knows best.

..follow in the footsteps of China, by protecting it's citizens from the internet. Good luck with that.

So do you avoid movies with Scientologist actors? This would seem to be exceedingly difficult if you like movies. I'd go as far as to say avoiding companies that continue to put out big movies with Tom Cruise in them would be a good thing. Like this new WWII flick he's got coming out. I won't be seeing it.

And I forgot to mention, I'm a musician, songwriter, composer and also a web designer. So I know what it's like to be on the content creation end as well.

He didn't go deep enough into the history of copyright to understand what copyright is really for. The original purpose of copyright has been so distorted by the lobbying and propagandizing power of various industries, that most lawmakers don't even know what it's really for. Everyone thinks, like this article's writer that it's to give "property rights" to content creators, so that they can protect their "intellectual property." What it's really therefore is to encourage the creation of creative works for the benefit of the greater good of the people (the greater good of the people should be behind all laws in a supposed democracy right?). It's purpose is to enrich a very important and undervalued concept called "the public domain." The temporary monopoly, is an incentive to content creators to create works which will ultimately enrich the public domain, at least in theory. The Public Domain has been completely destroyed by this process of lobbying and propagandizing corporate desires into legislation. Much of the significant creative work of the past century is caught up in it, even if it's not available to the public (this is more common than you might think.) So, let's always remember that the people in general are a much larger and more important group than the content creators. Copyright is a privilege granted by the people. The fact that "right" is part of the word I think is a bit misleading. It's not an inalienable right like life and liberty, as many people, this author included seem to not understand.

It sounds beautiful until steam decides you've done some questionable activity on your steam account, then they have the option of using a kill switch on your entire collection. I don't think they necessarily use it, other than to kill people's online gaming if they cheat, but the fact that they have the ability to take back what I paid for freaks me out. At first I was very happy about Steam and I have a few steam games, like Defcon, and HL2, but I don't play them because I took steam off my computer. I gave my steam account to my son cause he likes those games.

The fit and finish of a fine automobile is nothing compared to an orbiter or even the older Apollo spacecraft, which are still marvels to behold. I know, I've traveled around to see all the ones that are available for viewing. I don't think you grasp the complexity of these machines whatsoever.

I'm already scared of flying, now I have to be scared that my fear of flying will trigger a red flag labeling me a terrorist...... great, I'll never fly again if they implement this craziness.