A pity that you don't play Cricket in the US - if you did then you could explain that backdooring encryption is a bit like preparing a spin friendly wicket. It may mean that your bowlers can get the other team out more easily - but if you are playing against India or Pakistan it is suicide!
It seems that loading copyright for all the reasons that "culture disappeared" ignores other factors for the decline in new book publications post 1910. There was a disturbance between 1914 and 1918 called World War One which may have had an effect.
Except that the graphs match the 1922 date much better than your dates.
The push for Life+70 started in the UK in response to the impending transfer of "Peter Pan" to the public domain. JM Barrie had assigned the copyright to Great Ormond St Children's Hospital and terrible sob stories were created around its impending loss of revenue.
Of course the other copyright holders that pushed this line knew that they themselves would benefit from term extension. Fortunately, at the time (1988), only Peter Pan had its copyright extended but the push for life+70 had started and a few years later it came in.
Of course what should have happened is that another generous author should have stepped up to donate a valuable copyright to Great Ormond St - to replace Peter Pan - allowing the older work to slip gently into the public domain.
The lyrics consist of 6 words (minus the repetition)
Actually it consists mostly of the title - and song titles are not copyrightable- hence the multiple versions of "The Power of Love" That leaves the words "to you" and "dear" - but they are present in the original "Good morning to all" in exactly the same place - relative to the music. Finally there is the "insert name here" concept - but that is an idea not an expression and hence is not copyrightable.
In conclusion it seems to me that "Happy Birthday" contains NO COPYRIGHTABLE ELEMENTS and hence has always been in the public domain.
Much of this is due to the vanity of the authors, who want to be published in an 'elite' journal or publisher, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get there.
No - it is not vanity - it is the mechanisms that are used to assess institutions* combined with a good helping of inertia.
* Actually it is the institutions perception of this mechanism that is the problem. The documentation for latest research assessment in the UK specified explicitly that publication venue would not be used as a criterion - but some institutions still insist on publication in well known journals for staff that are entered into the exercise.
Typically the most senior ones will be paid, often they are academics on sabbatical from their usual job. There will also be some paid administrators associated with each journal. However most of the work is done for free by unpaid volunteers - who do it on the basis that it helps their career.
No need to single out Scientology. All religions do this. It's their business model.
WRONG - the real business model for Christianity has been the exact opposite. Single out the most powerful people in the land and convert them - the rest will follow. If the Emperor Constantine had not been converted there would be little or no Christianity in the world today. Look at the history of any European Christian country and you will see the same pattern.
The US is an aberration because your founding fathers decided not to have an official denomination (although at the time Christianity was nearly universal amongst the settlers). Consequently in the US religions often use the business model of a cult - which is what you deacribe. However the US is different from pretty much everywhere else in the world in that respect.
The same outcome the state was hoping for, even if its attempt to remove the juror was deemed to be "abusive" by the court. Not quite the same outcome - they don't get to remove the juror they don't like - they just get to roll the dice again. Unfortunately the statistics are in their favour - but there remains a small chance that the new jury will have another awkward individual on it - and they will probably not have the nerve (or the finances) to keep repeating the excersise.
Reality is terrorist just like the corporation of Scientology do not target regular folks be they adults or minors. They specifically target mentally challenge individuals, those suffering mental illness, vulnerable people easy to manipulate.
Strangely this seems to be exactly what the FBI do too - when they fabricate their plots!
I didn't say they have the same opinion, only that they both hold extreme opinions,
Viewed across the history of the human race their opinions are not extreme. Actually it is YOUR opinions that are extreme. Just about every ordinary person (ie who is not a beneficiary of the copyright system) that I have met who has thought about the issue thinks like either Nina or Larry. Before 1500 there was no copyright and most people of that era would have thought the concept to be bizarre.
Hate crime laws are meant to protect those still on the wrong side of violent systemic discrimination. For that purpose they are valid.
No they are not. Ordinary laws, properly applied, will do that just fine. Hate crime laws simply give an unfair advantage to those who, whilst nominally belonging to the disadvantaged group, are in fact wealthy and powerful.