Simple way to level things is what is used in Germany - fees are limited to a fixed small percentage of the value being argued about, but if you demand a large amount and get only a small amount, you actually count as the loser (so a large corporation suing you for 100 million dollars and awarded $100 would actually pay 99.9999% of the total cost).

In the case of patent trolls demanding huge money, even if they are rewarded a small amount, they would have to pay all the cost.

Of course. Didn't he say "Only a fool wouldn't buy an Apple Watch"?

We are talking about Germany here. Judges there don't like it if you game the system. Steamboat Willy would have to be on sale publicly, so that everyone who wants to watch it can do so. And judges can see if the price is exorbitant so that no actual sales are made.

So it covers my reasoning against eternal copyright: That copyright makes works disappear if the copyright owner doesn't care about it anymore. It doesn't cover lots of people's reasoning: That eternal copyright is bad because we want things for free.

Before software was protected by copyright, which happened sometime in the 80's or so, in Germany software was protected by "unfair competition law". Quite simply, if A hires developers for a million to write software and sells it, and B just copies the software, that is unfair competition. However, "unfair competition" only applies if A is actually selling the software; if A doesn't sell it, then B isn't competing with A at all, whether fair or unfair. Obviously now software is under copyright, so things have changed.

With very old works the same could be done: Let them run out of copyright. However, it would be "unfair competition" and thus illegal to compete with the copyright holder. So as long as Disney is selling Steamboat Willy, it would be protected. If they stop selling it, you can copy it and even sell it freely.

There is monetary incentive if you can put the movie onto a shelf in the shops and sell it. Most people don't actually copy stuff. And those with huge illegal collections don't actually listen to or watch all the stuff that they copied. So you have to be careful estimating how many sales would be lost. And at last, you _can_ put DRM onto works in the public domain if you feel like it.

On the other hand, if people are worried about cultural values being lost, and these people are not the copyright holders, then works being in the public domain is actually very helpful for society. Because these people _can_ restore movies without having one foot in jail.

Apple makes more profit selling PCs than all the other manufacturers together, and these profits are growing year after year after year. Why would they get out of that business?

Apple stopped selling music with DRM over six years ago. But it would seem that the problem is connecting to the Apple Store and purchasing (which hurts mostly Apple) and playing music and videos with DRM _on that computer_. Everything should continue to work phone on iPod, iPhone and iPad.

Anyone here who has actually listened to or viewed DRM protected content from Apple on Windows XP in the last year?

They had to, after one developer conference was sold out within less than two minutes...

I'm not sure what exactly is going on with GÃbbel's family, but Hitler's works are owned by the state of Bavaria, and they do what they can to prevent any neo-nazis from copying it (other people don't seem to be very interested in these works). It might not be about the money, but about preventing publication. Which in this case would be understandable.

Where do you see that? Usually what you get is that you don't have a valid license until you review the terms and agree to them, and if you disagree, you can return the product.

... and anything from iPhone 4 upwards can use iOS 7. There is practically no reason not to write for IOS 7 exclusively, since nobody with iOS 6 is going to buy any apps anymore.

Even weaker is spouting nonsense about people who commit suicide, without the slightest clue why it happens.

Actually, you can create completely invisible variable names. Shame that superscript 2 and superscript 3 are not valid for custom operators.

If they don't, terrorists will start buying almonds to destroy California.

As an example where "truth vs. verifiability" leads was actually discussed on Slashdot here: http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

Short version: Man is added to Wikipedia with wrong name. While he tries to get it changed, a usually reputable newspaper copies his wrong name from the Wikipedia article. Result: The wrong name can now be verified from a reputable source.