|
|
|
|
|
by dessant
2378 days ago
|
|
Facebook has been doing everything in their power to gradually erode people's privacy, so their business model is strongly consumer-hostile, unless contributing to the erosion of civil liberties and human rights isn't considered hostile towards people. Disney's attack on culture through the lobbying of copyright extensions is not an excuse for what Facebook is doing. Both companies need to be dealt with, and we can do our part by not defending them when there's an opportunity to call them out. |
|
Nitpick: that should be "a copyright extension", not "copyright extensions". There have only been two copyright extensions that have affected Disney: the Copyright Act of 1976 and the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.
I haven't been able to find any evidence that they lobbied for the 1976 Act. Probably because there would have been no need for lobbying, as the 1976 Act had near universal support.
That's because it was a major overhaul of US copyright law, which went a long way toward making US copyright law compatible with the Berne Convention. (There was still a lot to do to actually allow the US to join the Berne Convention--those final changes were in the Berne Implementation Act of 1988).
I'm not sure how the popular notion that Disney is constantly getting copyright terms extended arose.