US copyright lasts for anywhere from 95 years, or the life of the creator plus 70 years, depending on a number of factors, such as when it was published and whether it was a hired work.

Initially, [Sir Arthur Conan] Doyle’s estate didn’t show up to court for the complaint. When [Leslie] Klinger filed a motion for summary judgment, the estate argued against Klinger’s right to use the character and for even greater copyright protection.

Klinger prevailed, and Doyle’s estate appealed.

That appeal prompted the seventh circuit court judges’ scathing affirmation of the expiration of copyright.

The estate argued that copyright should continue to apply because Holmes was made a more “round” character in the last 10 stories.

“Flat characters thus don’t evolve. Round characters do; Holmes and Watson, the estate argues, were not fully rounded off until the last story written by Doyle. What this has to do with copyright law eludes us,” wrote Judge Richard A Posner in the court’s opinion.

The decision is one of the few where a reader might find a federal court discussing Star Wars. Judges said that the estate’s argument was tantamount to an argument that copyrights on Star Wars, Episodes IV, V and VI were extended because of the release of Episodes I, II and III.

“We don’t see how that can justify extending the expired copyright on the flatter character,” Posner wrote.

–Jessica Glenza writing in Sherlock lives in public domain, US court rules in case of the heckled brand for The Guardian.

I think that every fiction writer at one time or another has considered, attempted and possibly completed an act of fan fiction and homage to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. (I certainly did in an unpublished novel written in the ’90s). The authors of the original, famously like Anne Rice when she told fans of Lestat to get their own damn characters, have a point. If your work is derivative, then you’re not really creating are you? Yes, yes, yes, I know, all stories refer to certain archetypes and even Shakespeare stole the idea for many of his plays, but the writing itself does count.

In his only legislative action that anyone will ever remember, Rep. Sonny Bono (minus Cher), acting as the paid stooge of Mickey Mouse’s masters, labored to see the Copyright Term Extension Act Mickey Mouse Protection Act passed. While Bono died on 5 January 1998, the Act passed on 7 October of that year.

Listen very carefully to Francis Marion’s words (as interpreted by Walt Disney in 1959) and you’ll understand why all imperial adventurism and colonialism ultimately fails.

Today, we’re making an important change to our Terms of Use. This change will clarify and strengthen the prohibition against concealing paid editing on all Wikimedia projects.

Half a billion people use Wikipedia every month as their source of knowledge. Wikipedia’s community editors work tirelessly at maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and objectivity of the articles, which requires identifying conflicts of interests and removing bias. Editing-for-pay can be a source of such bias, particularly when the edits are promotional in nature, or in the interest of a paying client. The Wikimedia Foundation is committed to continuing to support the Wikipedia community’s efforts to keep articles free of promotional content.
What’s changing?

This change adds a new subsection to Section 4, Refraining from Certain Activities, on “Paid Contributions without Disclosure.” The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has issued a letter explaining the change. We have also prepared an FAQ that helps explain how the change applies in specific instances. We encourage you to read the full update, letter, and FAQ, but the most important points are:

–If you edit as a volunteer and for fun, nothing changes. Please keep editing! You’re part of an amazing community of volunteers contributing to an unprecedented resource of free information available to the whole world.

–If you are employed by a gallery, library, archive, museum (GLAM), or similar institution that may pay employees to make good faith contributions in your area of expertise and not about your institution, you are also welcome to edit! The FAQ provides more guidance on when you should provide disclosure.

–If you are paid to edit, you will need to disclose your paid editing to comply with the new Terms of Use. You need to add your affiliation to your edit summary, user page, or talk page, to fairly disclose your perspective. You’ll want to read the FAQ to learn more.

–If you are paid to edit, other rules beyond the Terms of Use may also apply. Specific policies on individual Wikimedia projects, or relevant laws in your country (such as those prohibiting fraudulent advertising), may require further disclosure or prohibit paid advocacy editing altogether. Details on the legal issues and risk associated with undisclosed paid advocacy editing may be found in this FAQ.

–Individual Wikimedia projects may discuss and implement alternative disclosure policies appropriate to their particular needs, as explained at greater length in the FAQ.

Why are we making a change?

As explained in October of 2013, we believe that undisclosed paid advocacy editing is a black hat practice that can threaten the trust of Wikimedia’s volunteers and readers. We have serious concerns about the way that such editing affects the neutrality and reliability of Wikipedia.

The change to the Terms of Use will address these concerns in a variety of ways. First, it will help educate and explain to good-faith editors how they may continue to edit in the spirit of the movement and mission, through simple disclosure of their affiliation. Second, it will empower the community to address the issue of paid editing in an informed way by helping identify edits that should receive additional scrutiny. Finally, it will provide an additional tool to the community and Foundation to enforce existing rules about conflicts of interest and paid editing.

–Geoff Brigham writing in Making a change to our Terms of Use: Requirements for disclosure.

Dear Marguerite,

You’re itching to be on your own. You don’t want anybody telling you what time you have to be in at night or how to raise your baby. You’re going to leave your mother’s big comfortable house and she won’t stop you, because she knows you too well.

But listen to what she says:

When you walk out of my door, don’t let anybody raise you—you’ve been raised.

You know right from wrong.

In every relationship you make, you’ll have to show readiness to adjust and make adaptations.

Remember, you can always come home.

You will go home again when the world knocks you down—or when you fall down in full view of the world. But only for two or three weeks at a time. Your mother will pamper you and feed you your favorite meal of red beans and rice. You’ll make a practice of going home so she can liberate you again—one of the greatest gifts along with nurturing your courage, that she will give you.

Be courageous, but not foolhardy.

Walk proud as you are,

Maya

Maya Angelou writing in What I Know Now: Letters to My Younger Self by way of Letters Of Note…

I’ve engaged in this exercise, writing a letter to my 13-years-old self and what I realized was that these exercises are filled with regret. We long to have done, yet we fail to do. We might lament, I wish my mother had forced me to learn to play the piano, but we do not say to ourselves, Today I shall sign up for piano lessons.

Angelou, in her brilliance, transcends the petty, the banal, and soars as she in wont too.

If we do not despise who we are (and we may well do so) then what has gone before is beyond regrets because changing even the smallest detail means change who we are in this moment, and, for me at least, that is not a good outcome.

From the moment I entered the insane ward on the island I made no attempt to keep up the assumed role of insanity. I talked and acted just as I do in ordinary life. Yet strange to say, the more sanely I talked and acted the crazier I was thought to be by all except one physician, whose kindness and gentle ways I shall not soon forget. —Nellie Bly

In 1887, two years after she launched her career with a response to a patronizing chauvinist and two years before she raced around the world in a quest to outpace Jules Verne’s fictional eighty-day itinerary, pioneering Victorian journalist Nellie Bly (May 5, 1864–January 27, 1922) pulled off one of the most courageous feats in the history of investigative reporting — posing as insane, she embedded herself at the Women’s Lunatic Asylum on Blackwell’s Island to bring public attention to the horrific brutality and neglect to which patients were subjected. Her resulting exposé, titled Ten Days in a Mad-House and originally published as a series of articles in New York World, is now included in the altogether fantastic collection Around the World in Seventy-Two Days and Other Writings (public library). The story not only established Bly, a twenty-something woman amidst a male-dominated Victorian media landscape, as a formidable and fearless journalist, but also led to a grand jury investigation, which she assisted in and which resulted in a $1,000,0000 increase in New York City’s budget for the care of the mentally ill. –Maria Popova writing in Ten Days at the Mad-House: How Nellie Bly Posed as Insane in 1887 in Her Pioneering Exposé of Mental Health Care

When I was in my pre/early teens I was a voracious reader of a series of young adult biographies. I did not think much of it at the time, but I’m sure that reading those books contributed greatly to my understanding of diversity and planted the seeds of journalism in my young mind.

Today’s headlines include:

Local News

Patriotic salute
WSCC can offer tuition guarantee
Confrontation with deputy leads to man’s arrest
Two rescued from duplex fire
Car show has special meaning

Top Headlines Poll: What do you think about online deals to buy pets?

(For comparison’s sake, I’ve added a link to the The Anchor News to these posts.)

What’s going on here…

Previously…

A police supervisor will return to the force in July after being fired for his role in the November 2012 chase that ended with two unarmed suspects killed in a hail of police gunfire.

Two demoted supervisors will also return next month to their previous ranks as a result of arbitration, Mayor Frank Jackson’s spokeswoman Maureen Harper said.

Former Sgt. Michael Donegan will returned July 11 as a patrol officer and will receive back pay since his termination in June 2013. He will return to the rank of sergeant in July 2015, according to the city.

Brandon Blackwell writing in Cleveland police supervisor to return to force after being fired for role in deadly November 2012 chase for the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

So, how much tax money–city and state–was spent across how many hours to produce this result achieved by arbitration? How about some details, Plain Dealer? How about we learn what the officers involved had on the city, and how much they were threatening to sue for? How about you go all Paul Harvey and tell us the rest of the story?

I thought the top front-page story in Saturday’s Marietta Times was spot on. So much so that I’ll be checking this week for a similar course here in Cuyaghoga County because I think such training will benefit me both as a citizen and as a professional. The comment exchange below perfectly illustrates the challenge our society faces.

janeeyre1

Are they kidding? This is only going to put innocent people in harm’s way. If a dangerous person with a mental illness is having a meltdown and they can’t tell reality from fantasy-I’m not going to try and reason with them, especially if they have a gun or knife. I’m going to lock myself in the nearest closet until help arrives. Too many lives have already been lost because mental health professionals have not been doing their jobs! So stop trying to make private citizens do your job for you!

Georgewbush4life

Wow. Someone missed the entire point of this article. I’d recommend reading it again and doing some research before you post such ridiculous and hateful comments. This program is an amazing tool that is helping communities all over the country improve their mental health awareness. If you knew anything about anything, you would realize that individuals with mental health diagnoses are more likely to be VICTIMS of violent crime than to commit them. Also, part of getting this training will be learning to reduce stigma so as to maybe not say such ridiculous things on the internet. I’m looking at YOU, janeeyre1.

janeeyre1

Great Post GW! I know some people who would love to hear you preach how people with mental illness are victims of stigma-the families of the victims of the Columbine, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech and Santa Barbra shootings all of which were orchestrated by someone with a mental illness who was being treated by a mental health professional. Instead of bleeding heart mentality we need mental institutions to keep dangerous people off the streets.

Georgewbush4life

Wow. Let’s hope nobody in your family ever experiences a mental health crisis. It’s ignorance and judgment like this that leads mental illness to be so isolating. Grow up.

janeeyre1

So your reaction to my statement of fact-emphasis on fact-is to pass judgment on me? How very immature! I’m sorry you can’t handle the fact that I brought an uncomfortable truth to your attention. But you are right in one respect. Parents and family members of people with serious cases of mental illness clearly need to be educated that these people should not be allowed to have access to guns. To me that’s a no brainer!

Brain illness is not contagious. Georgebush4life is correct that the program is designed to head off violence, to help lay people (and professionals whose work is tangential to Brain Wellness) identify and aid those with challenges to seek and receive professional care. Janeeyre1 is stuck in the age of Nellie Bly.

I like how this particular quote from Tom ties in with my oft-written We build our communities with our conversations. This is how we build our communities–whether it be a brownie troop or a factory floor–and how we head off those erroneous beliefs that lead to conflict.

To the Editor
The Parkersburg News and Sentinel
11 June 2014:

While the flood of hatred toward the current President and his policies has become a trickle compared to what it was in 2010, the op-ed page in the Sunday edition of The News-Sentinel usually contains at least one or two letters, long on rhetoric and short on facts, suggesting that imminent doom is at hand if Mr. Obama is allowed to remain in office. A June 8 letter from Mark Hartshorn of Marietta entitled “America’s enemies within” provides a typical example of such reactionary and redundant silliness. [Copy in bold, here and below, was redacted from the original. JH]

The writer says that “our most basic rights are being eroded, and very few people seem to care.” He cites the “harassment of conservative groups by the IRS,” even though there is ample evidence that groups on both ends of the political spectrum were audited, and that some groups warranted it by falsely claiming to be “charitable” or “educational” entities when in fact they were engaged in blatant political activities. Hartshorn says that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is sponsoring a bill “to limit free speech.” This foolishness is believable only if one subscribes to the Mitt Romney notion that “corporations are people” and that lobbyists working for wealthy companies should be allowed to donate unlimited amounts of money to buy attack ads and influence elections across the nation.

The writer adds–without offering one shred of evidence–that the Obama administration is causing a “breakdown in the morals of our society” by “limiting freedom of religion” and “curbing gun-owner rights.” The last time I noticed, persons and groups with strong religious views have encountered practically no opposition in their ongoing efforts to insert their (often biased and sectarian) beliefs into practically every public occasion. And exactly what Second Amendment “rights” are being “taken away?” Certainly not those of a local Ku Klux Klan group that toted assault weapons, burnt crosses, issued hate-speeches, and cavorted for the camera in Mountwood Park on April 26 within sight of (and with the possible endorsement from) Wood County law-enforcement officials. While our local media chose to ignore the event, it was reported in the June 8 edition of (would you believe?) the UK Daily Mail>. Would an Islamist terror-organization be afforded the same privilege?

The gripes of Mr. Hartshorn are perfect examples of what psychologists call “projection.” While FOX-fixated zealots claim that their rights are being “eroded,” reality suggests otherwise–as we can see by observing right-wing Republican attempts to Gerrymander Congressional districts’ block voter access to the polls, buy up local media in efforts to censor opposition opinions, and the belief spread by some ardent tea-partiers that democracy “has no place” in an American “republic.” If these folks want to see “America’s enemies within,” they need go no further than their nearest mirror!

Fred O’Neil
Marietta, Ohio

Fred was kind enough to send me his original text so that I could compare his words to the redacted version published yesterday by The Parkersburg News and Sentinel. I was able to do the comparison only because I made a point of buying (for $2) the Sunday edition of the paper while I was visiting my home town of Marietta, Ohio. (The visit, including breakfast with Fred, was wonderful and we couldn’t have asked for a more beautiful weekend.)