If anyone every needs a copy of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1909. I have a copy.
Good news for folklorists: [taxonomies are not copyright-able](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1233610.html) according to the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Infinite Copyright Is Killing Culture. This is one of those one chart tells a very compelling story posts. And the interesting bit is that the chart is based on Amazon sales. In brief: books in the public domain sell well.
TechDirt has an [interesting write-up and commentary](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090114/0831213405.shtml) about a recent [Brookings Institution conference](http://www.brookings.edu/events/2009/0114_patents.aspx) on software patents. The writer suggests the real problem is that the members of the different fields present — lawyers on the one hand and economists and technologists on the other — simply have very different experiences, and thus understandings, of the nature of the work and of the problems associated with it. One commenter to the write-up pointed out that a fourth field, businesses that pay for software to be developed, is implied and that it probably falls in line with the lawyers.
I have yet to make my way through Zizek’s [Parallax View](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0262240513?ie=UTF8&tag=johnlaudun-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0262240513), but I suspect that it’s describing a similar phenomenon.