Although recent copyright laws appear to make it almost impossible for any
education to progress beyond the date they become operational, the writer
who recently wrote really seems to claim a far too great a simplification.

I do not seem to recall that ideas, so far as they are ideas, are subject
to U.S.A. copyright.  Even after the work is fixed. What law is the basis
for that claim?

Who is going to subsidize textbooks that are completely and totally
documented (and thus run into thousands of pages and very large book bags).
I have seen a few fairly thoroughly documented advanced textbooks.
Strangely very few elementary or high school textbooks are significantly or
usefully documented.  The same is true for most college or university
texts.

Would not a digital file projected onto a classroom wall not constitute a
fixed form in this discussion and provide ground for flunking any student
who quoted "too much" of one of those projections in his answers to exam
questions?  Might increase creativity, but perhaps also contribute heavily
to nonsense verbage.

Does the recent writer claim that all "fair use" has been eliminated by
recent laws?

Why no mention of the restrictions on producing derivative works?  A
difficult field to define, but a very real one.

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html