America is facing a crisis on two fronts. One is financial bankruptcy and the other, just as serious, is moral bankruptcy. I believe there is a direct corrolation between the two, corruption and greed. The love of money and power, the idea that serving the people has become self serving. Anthony Weiner’s behavior is just a symptom of the problem. Many Americans have become desensitized, finding Mr. Weiner’s story mildly entertaining instead of abhorring. Even more amazing is that 56% of his constituents don’t want him to resign….yet another symptom of the deterioration of our morality.
WE THE PEOPLE must hold our government officials accountable by:
- Make lobbying illegal
- Term limits
- Publically financed elections
What’s happened to our moral compass as a Nation? What happened to judging a man on the content of his character? Does New York even know what character is anymore? When a public official is corrupted by greed and power they begin to feel entitled. This entitlment mentality has led to Mr. Weiner’s denials, his lying, his degenerate behavior and arrogance. We should as a nation, hold our elected officials to a higher moral standard. America is this the kind of representation you find acceptable? Apparently New Yorkers in Mr. Weiner’s Congressional District think so.
Loading ...
Well, I can’t hear it, but it’s because I don’t have Flash ilanslted. So I’ll do my best to recreate it:There are three categories of defense to copyright infringement: Permission/consent, arguing that the work is not copyrighted/copyrightable, and fair use. A permission defense would argue that the creator of the work authorized the use made. This defense usually comes up in cases where at least an attempt was made to formally license the work, and the dispute is over whether or not the actual use made falls within the scope of the license. Just sending the work to the alleged infringer (publisher) does not imply consent to publish.Second, the publisher may claim that the work is not actually copyrighted. Works can go into the public domain by operation of time alone (the copyright expires) or sooner if the work is deeded to the public. I’m not sure if denying authorship would constitute a deed to the public, but Mr. Wiener did initially deny authorship of at least some of the messages. Also, the copyright statute explicitly deeds to the public all works created by the federal government, so an argument could be made that if these works were created by Mr. Wiener in his official capacity, they are not copyrighted.The third category is fair use. Fair use is broad and was intentionally left only partially defined in the statute. It includes news coverage and commentary, so this is probably where the legal arguments are (or will soon be) made. You can read the fair use part of copyright code at 17 usc 107 (Google it).