Question about copyrights/legalities in the Blogosphere

Just a throwout question, because I am not getting good answers with any google search, but it's pretty simple:

I and a few others want to start a writing club - that is, we get together and we work on our stuff in order to help each other prepare for publication. We can't seem to physically get together in the same physical space at the same time. I wanted to start a "virtual" club, a place on the Internet where we can get together and work on stuff, either at the same time, or leave stuff there for others to work on and share at various times, etc. We also want it to be secure - but some of the others want to know about copyright laws. Since this work will be uploade to the 'net, and since our "virtual" room will be hosted on some place like MySpace, what are the laws regarding intellectual ownership of the material. Will MySpace (just for an example) have any right over the material?

I know cases like this have come up over the years, for example, if you use a work computer to write a novel, does your work have any legal right to compensation for any monies you receive from your novel? I don't remember the outcome of such cases, but I know they exist.

Does anybody out there have any leads or advice? Is anybody even listening? Is this thing on?




VG

Presidential Elections and the Slingin' O the Mud

Last night our pastor gave us some examples, culled from several different books, reminding us that politics has always been dirty, and smear campaigns are nothing new. I jotted a few notes, as best I could, with whatever paper I had at hand, and although I didn't get them all, here are my notes, for your edification and hope that you will sally forth and explore more on your own:

Going all the way back to 1800's, when Thomas Jefferson was running for President, ministers lambasted him. There were cartoons that depicted him as a drunken anarchist. The President of Harvard said, "Our wives and daughters will become victims of legal prostitution."

In fact, some historians cite that year and the election of 1828 as the worst of dirty politics. 1828 was John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson - Adams portrayed Jackson as a vicious killer who shot nine of his own soldiers in cold blood.

Adams' father, John Adams, in an earlier campaign, had been called a "Rageful lying womanizing fellow." (In this day and age that might actually be considered a compliment . . . it'd probably even win you the election!)

Even in 1858, the Lincoln/Douglas debates, which unfortuneately were not recorded for posterity, were, by all accounts, rife with witticisms, criticisms, offhanded insults, and sarcastic slaps.

There were many others that I didn't get written down, but as I said, there have been several books written on the subject.

But you know, in many ways we are more mature now, let's face it, if McCain and Obama had been campaigning back in the early 1800's, posters would probably claim that McCain was a "lying spiteful planecrasher weakling who broke in the face of danger, a philandering playboy who left his ailing wife for the bed and money of a younger woman."

and McCain would write back that Obama was an "unloved half-breed who was raised with tropical pagans who had a secret agenda to rid America of Christianity and to make government interfere with every aspect of a citizens life."

Wait a minute!

McCain's campaign ALREADY SAID ALL THAT.

Well,

they didn't call him a "half-breed"



. . . . not directly, anyway.







VG

Relinquish Your Party Affiliation

The hot topic for government today is that everybody is upset with bi-partisan bickering. All the people are disgusted with it, and we talk endlessly about it, saying, "Why can't the Dems and the Repubs just work together and help get this country fixed?"

The Republos are just p'o'd that they can't ram down every bill that will allow big business to continue to rape America, and probably they have a right to be torqued - those guys pay them their real $$ under the table, and if they ain't got it, then the Congressmen ain't got it neither.

Perhaps that's unfair to state the the Republicans are on the take. Perhaps they are simply idealists who truly believe that to allow big business not to have to pay their fair share of the taxes will give them so much money that they will magically shower it upon the rest of the citizenry. Perhaps.

Or perhaps they truly are afraid that the Dems are just going to turn America into one big turgid bureaucratic machine where to withdraw your own money from the bank you'll have to fill out a form in triplicate and stand in line while three government employees review your request.

Whatever,

Americans want the party bickering to stop - pure and simple. So here's my plan - it's not an award-winning plan, and I don't even know how feasible it is but here goes:

Whenever any of these idiots gets elected, the moment they take office, they relinquish their Party Affiliation. This goes for judges (actually I think it's Constitutionally mandated for judges - will somebody please check on that and get back to me?), the Congress, and the President alike.

Part of the problem now is that the Democratic Party is trying to influence the outcome of two state Senatorial elections in order to get a Demo in so that they can have a super majority - but that means they are influencing politics not to get the best person in, just the person for their party. This also indicates that party allegiance outweighs good decision making every time.'

If we forced all these people to give up their appelations, they would not be trying for these "Filibuster-proof" majorities - they would know that we want them to get down to business.

Now, I'm not so much an idealist that I think this will suddenly make them all hold hands and sing Kumbaya, but I think it would establish an atmosphere in which they see themselves as Senators and Representatives, and not as Democractic or Republican Senators, or Republican or Democratic Representatives. I think establishing the mood will go a long way to fostering the type of cooperation that we want to see in our government.

Look, they represent people of specific districts and specific states, right? A Republican senator represents an entire state, not just the Republicans in that state - No! He or she represents everybody! Including the Libertarians!

Sure, I believe that they still will vote along their party lines, and I think they'll still have the same alliances - but at least they wouldn't be so brazen about slinging their stupid Donkey vs. Elephant banners.

Let me know what you think.

Or, better yet, don't. Use your energy to write to your congressperson, your senator, and tell them that you demand, as their constituent, that they put aside their bickering and FIX THIS BEEYATCH!!

thankyouverymuch



VG

Quiet Sunday Night

Well, it's a quiet Sunday night and just about ready for some sleepytime, and just wanted to wish everybody out there in the blogosphere a good rest, or whatever the rest of you do for relaxation, I hope that it IS indeed relaxing, and enjoyable, and fun, and I sincerely pray that it is life affirming and is honestly good for you.

You know, before I saunter off to the waiting arms of my beloved spouse, I wanted to say that there are things that need to be explored in the coming years, and I will do so as best as I can, but let's start with the basics: that Christianity has gotten kind of a bad rap, and I'm coming to believe that most of the fault lies with Christians. Yes, the generations and centuries of frail and fault-laden human beings that have not cared for Christianity the way that it should be tended. I thought of this tonight actually while watching Masterpiece Theater's version of Oliver Twist, and the scene in which the court was going to hang Fagin the Jew, and the Judge told him that the only way he would offer clemency was if he converted to Christianity - right there. Fagin couldn't do it - he was a devout Jew. So he was hanged.

And I thought, well, even though I believe that it is only through Christ that we attain Heaven, even I know that a forced conversion is no conversion at all, and this method is definitely not showing the Love of Christ. You see, we cannot FORCE Christ on people, we have to live His words and show the love and peace that He brings, and that is how we win souls to Christ.

Too many centuries have been spent doing the opposite, and now we as Christians have tried so hard to make amends for all the Christ-bludgeoning that we now even hardly talk about Him to people at all. That, too, is just as bad as yammering about Him.

So, with that, (and my lovely wife wants me to go to sleep now), I want to sincerely wish everybody out there on the Internet right now at this very moment that each and every one of you have a wonderful, blessed life, and may God favour all of you, and remember, Jesus loves each and every single one of us alive on this earth, and that is a wonderful blessing.'

To all a good night!

Dem Russians

Just heard today that the Russians just closed down the US supply base that feeds our troops in Afghanistan.

Actually, that's a simplistic description. Technically, Kyrgystan, a supposedly independent nation (yet formerly a Soviet Socialist Republic) is where the base is located, and as a sovereign entity they have full control over who bases themselves in their country.

But truly, you'd have to be a complete fool not to connect 1 plus 1 - as they moved to close that base not two weeks after the Russians promised them $2 BILLION in financial aid.

However, I did some scoping around the net, and I think I've found someone to help us out.

This guy,


right here


says that


he'll let our troops


refuel


in his tent!