Since You Asked

I record cover versions of songs I love and put them up on the internet. As a rabid supporter of the rights of content creators, a few years ago I did a little research, found a copyright service called Limelight, and sent them $141.60 for the first three gems I recorded and uploaded. (I sincerely hope some of that money found its way to the actual artists, but that’s a whole ‘nuther blog post.) Those licenses entitled me to 200 downloads and 100 streams for each song. How did I come up with those numbers? I guessed. Limelight closed down in 2015. I assume the Harry Fox Agency has taken over collecting money from the other chumps like me who try to follow the rules. Ah, the rules. The rules are vague, because the internet. To take the prime example, the people who put stuff up on YouTube, self included, use what  Andy Baio in Wired  calls the “begging for forgiveness” model: you upload the tune and wait to see what happens. If a legitimate copyright holder objects to your

Here are a couple of quotes taken directly from each party’s 2016 platform. At first they may seem unrelated, but I promise you that the two are speaking about the exact same subject, and illustrate the stark differences between the parties. First, the GOP. The Declaration [of Independence] sets forth the fundamental precepts of American government: That God bestows certain inalienable rights on every individual, thus producing human equality; that government exists first and foremost to protect those inalienable rights; that man-made law must be consistent with God-given, natural rights; and that if God-given, natural, inalienable rights come in conflict with government, court, or human-granted rights, God-given, natural, inalienable rights always prevail; that there is a moral law recognized as “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”; and that American government is to operate with the consent of the governed. Now, the Democrats. We will appoint judges who defend the constitutional