It's awkward to transfer electronically.
The contract with the author would require royalties anyway. Of course they could publish it without royalties after 14 years, but so could everyone else, which means other publishers would drive price down to the cost of production.
Just like the DMCA over in the US: It's often used as a means of harassment.
In music, most works are made under contract, so the copyright is with the label. This isn't the case in other industries. Publishing, for example. It would be most awkward for a publisher if their star author were to get hit by a car and die - the publisher would have paid them money in advance for the exclusive license, and suddenly every competitor would be able to start printing and selling the books cheap. That's why the 'life plus x' thing.
Most commercial works make the majority of their money within the first decade. Who still wants to buy the #1 hits of 2004? Only a very small number of works have the cultural staying power to still be in demand after even a decade, and those that do will make such a huge amount when new as to cover production costs easily. Why would 14 years be too short?
The first Harry Potter book was published in 1997. On a 14-year term, it would have gone out of copyright in 2011. Do you think the franchise had made enough money by then?
It'd also be illegal. The Berne convention specifies life+term protection as a minimum.
Species is something of a meaningless concept in asexual organisms. They only get classified for the sake of convenience.
Obfuscated. Silly spellcheck.
You could read it, if you can translate from political doublespeak. I couldn't find anything about term extension of penalties, though there is a bit in there about enforcement. As best I can try to follow the semi-english obstruction, it seems to be proposing requiring ISPs and banks to take an active role in blocking infringing websites and cutting off their funding.
These are the most annoying parts, translated as best I can from Politician:
3.2.6: Extend the blank media levy to Europe-wide, rather than country-by-country.
3.3.4: Proposes increasing 'due diligence' burden on 'all actors in the value chain.' I think this means increase ISP liability for internet piracy so they are forced to preemptively block sites providing infringing content. It also specifically talks about the role of financial institutions in ensuring infringing services are unable to do business.
Owning more than four, or offering one for sale. Much as with drugs, owning more than a quantity deemed appropriate for personal use is automatically considered intent to distribute.
It's also a state where you can be imprisoned for owning a sex toy.
Texas's economic success masks the widespread archaic views of the population.
Evidence against them only makes them stronger.
I've been using Scientific Linux because it was slightly more up-to-date than CentOS at the time I installed my server.
A possibility, but a poor cover. If I wished to covertly develop a military supply delivery system - and I wouldn't, because there's nothing really illicit about that to justify such a cover-up - I would think disaster relief a better justification. Think of a truck loaded with a hundred of these things driving as far as it can into an area struck by earthquake, hurricane, or other natural disaster - the drones launch, fly away, seek out survivors, and drop to each one a 'three day survival pack' consisting of water, some high-energy food, antiseptic, bandages, and possibly a thermal blanket if weather requires. Just enough to keep everyone alive and well while the human rescuers clear the roads and get the long-term disaster relief workers in.