Update

copyright.md

@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ Copyright (better called copyrestriction) is one of many types of so called [int
 
 When someone creates something that can even remotely be considered artistic expression (even such things as e.g. a mere collection of already existing things), they automatically gain copyright on it, without having to register it anywhere or let it be known anywhere. They then have practically full control over the work and can successfully sue anyone who basically just touches it in any way. Therefore **any code without a [free](free_software.md) license attached is implicitly fully owned by its creator** (so called "all rights reserved") and can't be used by anyone without permission. It is said that copyright can't apply to ideas, only to expressions of ideas, however that's [bullshit](bs.md), the line isn't clear and is arbitrarily drawn by judges; for example regarding stories in books it's been established that the story itself can be copyrighted, not just its expression (you can't rewrite the Harry Potter story in different words and start selling it).
 
-The current form of copyright (as well as other types of IP such as software patents) has been highly criticized by many people, even those whom it's supposed to "protect" (e.g. small game creators). Strong copyright laws basically benefit corporations and "trolls" on the detriment of everyone else. It smothers creativity and efficiency by prohibiting people to reuse, remix and improve already existing works. Most people are probably for *some* form of copyright but still oppose the current extreme form which is pretty crazy: copyright applies to everything without any registration or notice and last usually 70 years (!!!) **after** the author has died (!!!) and is already rotting in the ground. This is 100 years in some countries. In some countries it is not even possible to waive copyright to own creations. Some people are against the very idea of copyright (those may either use waivers such as [CC0](cc0.md) or [unlicense](unlicense.md) or protest by not using any licenses and simply ignoring copyright which however will actually discourage other people from reusing their works).
+The current extreme form of copyright (as well as other types of IP such as software patents) has been highly criticized by many people, even those whom it's supposed to "protect" (e.g. small game creators). Strong copyright laws basically benefit corporations and "trolls" on the detriment of everyone else. It smothers creativity and efficiency by prohibiting people to reuse, remix and improve already existing works. Most people are probably for *some* form of copyright but still oppose the current extreme form which is pretty crazy: copyright applies to everything without any registration or notice and last usually 70 years (!!!) **after** the author has died (!!!) and is already rotting in the ground. This is 100 years in some countries. In some countries it is not even possible to waive copyright to own creations. Some people are against the very idea of copyright (those may either use waivers such as [CC0](cc0.md) or [unlicense](unlicense.md) or protest by not using any licenses and simply ignoring copyright which however will actually discourage other people from reusing their works). Though copyright was originally intended to ensure artists can make living with their works, it has now become the tool of states and corporations for universal censorship; states can use copyright to for example take down old politically inconvenient books shared on the internet even if such takedowns do absolute not serve protection of anyone's living but purely political interests.
 
-Prominent critics include [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) (who established [free culture](free_culture.md) and [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md)) as a response), [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md) and [Richard Stallman](rms.md).
+Prominent critics of copyright include [Lawrence Lessig](lessig.md) (who established [free culture](free_culture.md) and [Creative Commons](creative_commons.md)) as a response), [Nina Paley](nina_paley.md) and [Richard Stallman](rms.md).
 
 The book *Free Culture* by Lessig talks, besides others, about how copyright has started and how it's been shaped by corporations to becoming their tool for monopolizing art. The concept of copyright has appeared after the invention of [printing press](printing_press.md). The so called *Statute of Anne* of 1710 allowed the authors of books to control their copying for **14 years** and only after **registartion**. The term could be prolonged by anothert 14 years if the author survived. The laws started to get more and more strict as control of information became more valued and eventually the term grew to **life of author plus 70 years**, without any need for registration or deposit of the copy of the work. Furthermore with new technologies, the scope of copyright has also extended: if copyright originally only limited *copying* of books, in the Internet age it started to cover basically any use, as any manipulation with digital data in the computer age requires making local copies. Additionally the copyright laws were passing despite being unconstitutional as the US constitution says that copyright term has to be finite -- the corporations have found a way around this and simply regularly increased the copyright's term, trying to make it [de-facto](de_facto.md) [infinite](infinity.md). Their reason, of course, was to firstly forever keep ownership of their own art but also, maybe more importantly, to **kill the [public domain](public_domain.md)**, i.e. prevent old works from entering the public domain where they would become a completely free, unrestricted work for all people, competing with their proprietary art. Nowadays, with coprporations such as [YouTube](youtube.md) and [Facebook](facebook.md) de-facto controlling most of infromation sharing among common people, the situation worsens further: they can simply make their own laws that don't need to be passed by the government but simply implemented on the platform they control. This way they are already killing e.g. the right to [fair use](fair_use.md), they can simply remove any content on the basis of "copyright violation", even if such content would normally NOT violate copyright because it would fall under fair use. This would normally have to be decided by court, but a corporation here itself takes the role of the court. So in terms of copyright, corporations have now a greater say than governments, and of course they'll use this power against the people (e.g. to implement censorship and surveillance).