It's also interesting (and somewhat ironic) in it's relation to the Mickey Mouse Copyright act. They have real chutzpah if you ask me. Thanks for the link - great refs.

What you're saying is true. ...but in your own words, "the purpose of copyrighting is to incentivize more creation." The entire purpose of copyrighting is to protect your intellectual property/ideas/designs in order to keep others from using them, right? Why would I want this type of protection? 1) to keep others from using it for financial gain (i.e., it would cut into my profit margin), and/or 2) to be recognized as the intellectual origin of the artifact.

If I were only interested in spreading knowledge for the benefit of mankind, I would just release my product into the wild without a copyright, as has been done numerous times. Take something like a free CSS template on the web - the terms of use are something like "just give us credit for creating this".

Hmmmm...well, not to mince words,but I said "expect", and you said "deserve" a profit. I don't know of any investors that think they *deserve* a profit. Investing, almost by definition, implies a level of risk and gambling. I definitely agree with your statement that people should be discouraged from expecting profits from unprofitable things. Kinda reminds me of the real-estate bubble fiasco we just went through.

True, but I was thinking more of the Reaper, which does have real time control and weapons systems. Which (according to wiki, it does have both autonomous and real time control, and of course can carry the Hellfire, Paveway, and JDAM missile systems. As far as data inputs for the systems, we've all seen the footage of the laser pointer guiding the LGMs to the target.

Let's not forget some of the bandwidth is taken up with real-time control of the aircraft. Other than video, there are a ton of sensors these things could carry, and I'm sure the weapons systems take up some bandwidth of their own.

From the tone of this thread, I doesn't sound like there are many artists involved in the discussion. It's not all about making $$ - yes, you want people to hear what you've made. BUT, an important (maybe the most important) aspect of being an artist is originality. I am an artist that happens to have a nice tech job, so it's not the end of the world if I don't get royalties. But I would be extremely upset if I found out someone had copied my idea and taken full credit for it. What makes you a worthwhile artist is what sets you aside from the crowd and makes you an original. That's why I want my material copyrighted.

Hmmmm...so now you're motivating me to make/copyright something so that it will be *less* successful so I can keep my copyright?

Sooooo....isn't that the definition of an investment? Because you're expecting to get some profit? I think what you're proposing would simply discourage people from investing.

I think that is spot on. Add to that the available means for both recording (home computers) and distribution (the interwebs) saturating the musicspace, and I think you have a pretty decent explanation of the chaotic state of the music scene today.

Not a bad thought - but I think of it more like a speculative investment. You might be funding the next Facebook, or you might be funding ILoveClippy.com. But I think there's some risk management, as someone else pointed out.

Hmmmm...this thread is definitely spinning it's wheels. I might have to take the drivers seat and steer us back on course.

Yeah, that's where the rubber meets the road

Actually, my bad. The summary should have read 30 miles for the Tempest drones, and 11 mi for the Cicadas. But your (impressive) 380 mi/sq radius is of course correct.