Before copyright, owners had complete control of the works forever.
No, before copyright anybody could copy whatever they wanted and do anything they wanted with it. It was just hard for the average person to copy things (for example, a lot of them were illiterate), and really hard to copy them in large quantities.
Hence directing the time of qualified engineers away from engineering, developing, inventing, and innovating and toward patent reviewing.
Good point. We should just abolish patents entirely. And before someone mentions that then we wouldn't have all these patents that disclose how to do these wonderful things, they don't do that anyway. They're designed to be not helpful to anyone else.
Because some crimes are just so obviously crimes that those defenses can't reasonably apply. You cannot seriously argue that a 16 year old cannot be expected to know that punching people in the head hard enough to knock them out for no reason is illegal, wrong, and will have severe consequences.
That's fine, as long as it's consistent. If all premeditated violent crime is treated as adult, I would have no problem with that. What would bother me is a seemingly random patchwork of "this crime will be tried in adult court because it seems really bad" and that other one isn't because it hasn't gotten much media attention.
I Hope you understand This Signing up with CD Baby is like loesing all of your legal copyrights to your songs because they say one thing but the digital contract says something else I need to know if any one ever take that to the court and all of this money talk but in the end nothing, since I sign up with CD Baby in 2011 I haven't receive a single cent it is unbelievable I give them 2 legal songs Wonder In The Dark and Kick Him Out registered by the Library of Congress my pro. is ASCAP and even to that I still get nothing if the copyright organizations can't find it that means they are selling those songs unknown to the U.S government in my book that is an illegal operation going on there, can I take this to a court?
I have no substantive comment, I just want to mention that this is all one sentence. Though I'm using that term loosely. ;-)
My overall impression from that section is that the distinction is, for most people, one of emphasis. The fact that it's in the etymology section rather than something like symptoms is telling, I think. But there are clearly some people who draw a real distinction between the words.
"All teenagers profile as sociopaths. That's why we don't diagnose that until they are at least 18." Now I know that show is fictional, but one of the fiction writers tools is to include some facts with their fiction. This may be one of them, and a believable one at that.
Sociopaths are superficially charming and charismatic, which certainly doesn't describe all teenagers.