This is just too "good" to not be abused!
If this goes through, I'd love to see a bunch of independent broadcasters, etc, start broadcasting EVERYTHING they can find (why not old shows by THE OTHER broadcasting companies?) and then license it freely to the entire world! :D
Being a little guy isn't a magic free pass to do anything. Just because you had an idea that you think is so great that you deserve a 20 year monopoly on it, that does not mean that you are the first one to have the idea.
Also, patents are supposed to appply to implementations. So just build something that works first, THEN file a patent for THAT. Then you can come back and tell us if it passed.
After that you can feel free to sue any big company that just blatantly takes your invention without paying.
But don't try to fool us to think that it is impossible for several people to have the same idea at around the same time independently of each other.
Wow, how constructive your post was. You even managed to get a few arguments in there. Or not.
For claiming that IPR is good for technology, you know awfully little about it. Your web site spits out this:
"Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, firstname.lastname@example.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/2.2.16 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.16 OpenSSL/0.9.8e-fips-rhel5 mod_bwlimited/1.4 mod_fastcgi/2.4.6 Phusion_Passenger/2.2.5 Server at truereform.piausa.org Port 80"
But no maybe I have violated your copyrights even though you never wrote any of that?
By the way, how funny that you use open source, patent free, software. That really supports your entire cause for stronger "property rights".
"Something like a FaceBook site for the creation and collaboration of music, Video, and remixing its over for the old media companies if done correctly."
GNU Social with a proper media creating and remixing plugin could do this!
First we have to make it work well, then we have to get enough (at least semi-)professionals to make cool videos and great music, and then we have to convince the public that it's easy to join in.
"Give me a property right and i'll fix my house - take it away and the neighbors might decide that we're all better off if they walk across my lawn and peek into my bedroom. The anticopyright movement thinks record company executives are stupid. I assure you - they are not."
Ah, it's the "easily duplicatable ideas equals scarce materia" argument. I can assure you that the "market" don't need exclusivity in order to be able to keep using all of the ideas at the same time.
And by the way, it's not a market - it's a culture of people. Movies and music should be treated as culture that should be free and that you participate in, not as commodities that somebody else makes.
Creativity will not end if exclusivities end, it will rather explode.
We will just not see $100 000 000 dollar Hollywood movies, but millions of movies made by hobbyists and amatuers that do the things they do because they love it.
"Second - the "it follows, therefore it was caused by" fallacy. innovation (by what measure?) was down, so greater IP must be responsible. How about weak economy? How about increased piracy? How about a ton of things we haven't even analyzed."
Let me reverse that. "IP laws was made, then the technological revolution came". Oh, sure, stronger exclusivities will make creativity and innovation go up. Not.
"COPYRIGHT DOES NOT PROTECT IDEAS. Read Section 102(b) of the copyright act. It protects expression."
Tell that to the Twilight copyright owners. They seem to think they own the names, the concept and anything with a forest, moon and the text "Twilight" on, et cetera.
"the "innovation" criticisms simply don't apply to copyright"
Except that most publisher could stop a book because you have quoted a line of 8 words. 8 words!? How is that not to stop innovation? What if I would come up with those words indepently and at the same time put it in a larger sentence, and have that taken down because of reusing 8 words?
Must everything be unique down to the letter?
"If you want people to spend their days and nights doing analysis, criticism, journalism and making art - then they need a way to get paid."
I guess you have forgotten all those billions examples of people that ARE getting paid without copyrights. It's about the experience, personal value and uniqueness!
It may sound like wierd Science Fiction, but here in Sweden the collection societies has recently accepted CC-licensed music as a royalty-free alternative (!).
Who knew that even they have people with brains?
"In some cases there is no realistic potential for me to make money off the secondary use, but in that situation it isn't actually costing me anything so I don't have any reason to object."
This should be highlighted more. If it doesn't cost you anything, then there's no reason to object.
Too few people think of it this way, they rather want to think of it as their right to be compensated for every single use and to have total control of everything, even if that means that EVERYBODY lose out on it,