Politics & Government - 7 July 2007

why? give alittle something to back up your claims!;-)

2007-07-07 10:50:11 · 3 answers · asked by dingoboy 1 in Politics

Hi there

i understand a fair bit about copyright but not the specifics when put into practice in music.

Heres the scenario:

a band of 4 people create and record an original song and record an EP. all 4 have an input by 2 maybe do the majority.

The 2 who arguably put the most into the song ie:created most of the lyrics and the chorus etc decide to leave the band and go their seperate ways.

The 2 remaining members recruit 2 new people and 1 year later decide to re-record the song that was created by the old members. Who owns the copyright?

Where do they stand if the new band want to re-record the song and release it potentially for financial gain?

any advice gratefully accepted, however please ensure it is relevant to the music industry and the situation rather than general basic copyright details

Many thanks in advance

2007-07-07 10:47:09 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

for example osama hitler etc....

2007-07-07 10:46:54 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2007-07-07 10:45:36 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

WELL! That bad bad man! Who cares?...Really! We live in a whole different era.

2007-07-07 10:41:05 · 16 answers · asked by The prophet of DOOM 5 in Politics

Was the dangers of DDT overly exaggerated or erroneous?

Thus exposing millions of people to malaria?

BTW...how many of you heard about this? (That dangers of DDT are erroneous)

2007-07-07 10:39:37 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

As these two tell conflicting stories...

2007-07-07 10:37:11 · 8 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics

2007-07-07 10:35:39 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

I heard he got caught in the rain without an umbrella, kept looking up to see where the water was coming from, and nearly drowned.

2007-07-07 10:33:42 · 19 answers · asked by dcb30 2 in Politics

February 8, 2007

A regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal says there is a huge divide between those who give to charity and those who don't.

Brooks says when he began his research, he expected to find proof that liberals are the more generous group in America. But his findings show that conservatives are more generous in every way -- from volunteering, to donating blood, to giving money.

For example, homes headed by a conservative gave 30 percent more money to charity in 2000 than liberal families. .

Brooks explains that, according to his research, a household headed by a conservative, on average, gives 30 percent more dollars to charity than does one headed by a liberal -- despite earning six percent less income. He finds that significant.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/02/conservatives_more_generous_th.php

2007-07-07 10:32:11 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Is this another thing we can anticipate with a Democratic presidential and congressional victory in 2008? Costs of care up, birth rates of Italians down due to abortion and cost of raising children, and the need to bring in more foreigners to help care for the elderly.

2007-07-07 10:29:53 · 5 answers · asked by ALASPADA 6 in Government

And before anyone names Gandhi or Luther King, keep in mind the main reason India was freed was because the UK was nearly bankrupt after WW2; and the main reason why Blacks were given civil rights in the USA was because the civil unrest had grown to unthinkable proportions.

Is war the only way to obtain rights?

2007-07-07 10:29:12 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

he was kicked out of the army for a 2nd degree burglary charge. but was not sentenced yet with the civilian side. Can the army do this or will the civilans have to drop charges cause of double jepoary?

2007-07-07 10:29:00 · 6 answers · asked by christina a 1 in Law & Ethics

Talk radio in America is predominantly right-wing. Many Democrats are floating the idea of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, which requires equal time on talk radio for opposite sides of the political aisle. Conservatives bash the idea on First Amendment grounds. Liberals say Americans are better informed when exposed to equal portions of both sides of an issue. Where do you stand?

2007-07-07 10:25:19 · 16 answers · asked by Tommy B 6 in Other - Politics & Government

2007-07-07 10:24:31 · 10 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics

One is engineer so I guess the common denomninator is they were all muslims...sunni from what I have read. I just read sunnis in iraq killed over 100 shias in a truck bomb today at of all places a market.

2007-07-07 10:24:26 · 9 answers · asked by Steelhead 5 in Politics

They wouldn't ask you to finish their jail sentence if they died in jail before they finished serving all of their time and aren't the fines incurred part of the sentence?

2007-07-07 10:22:15 · 5 answers · asked by Penny K 6 in Law & Ethics

Hey, I'm a droupout with no GED and soon, nowhere to go, will the military take me?

2007-07-07 10:17:28 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

What do you think? Please explain why or why not.

2007-07-07 10:17:22 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Why did Bush allow an election outcome to determine Rumsfeld's position?

2007-07-07 10:13:20 · 8 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics

I will!

2007-07-07 10:11:01 · 11 answers · asked by Lindsey G 5 in Politics

Your favorite candidate is in the single digits in the polls . Obviously and absolutely zero chance of winning. . . .. What do you do ?

Do You Vote For Your Candidate , Knowing Your Vote For Him/Her Won't Help Them Get Elected ?
OR
Do You Pick A Candidate That Most Closely Reflects Your Views And Try To Help That One Get Elected ?

And Why ?

For anyone who still chooses to vote for a candidate that has no chance , I really would like to see a good explanation for it . I mean you've got to take into consideration that your candidate is just not gonna win today and someone else will win . Wouldn't it then make much more sense to try and get your second choice elected ?

2007-07-07 10:06:33 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Does it make you stupid if you can't realize that the world would be a more dangerous place if the people who strapped bombs to their chests to kill others, controlled the government who controlled the oil riches of Iraq? Or would that just make you naive?

-----
Can anyone explain to me how the security of a stable government in Iraq is not in the interest of not only our national security, but that of the world?

2007-07-07 10:05:59 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

I was aghast to read a media report of a 27-year-old Muslim woman and mother of two dying in starvation due to abject poverty in India on the same day when the Sensex touched a record 15000. This happened in a State where all politicians are super rich and some are worth unaccounted billions. A politician last week opened up a new facility worth several crores for a billionaire mindless Tamilnadu Evangelist. You may take it an emotional outburst, but I dare to ask a question in common parlance “How can you digest the food you gulp in plenty when your brethren are starving for want of the basic need, the food”. In my life I have experienced the pain of hunger in my youth and I know what it is and when I read my brethren in Northern India eating roots, grass and barks of trees, I go into an emotional trauma. India is a country where most NGOs are luxury-ridden and economic and political abuses are high in its graph. Is there a way out for the land of snake charmers from this jinx?

2007-07-07 10:05:50 · 8 answers · asked by Nimit 2 in Government

1. numerous tax breaks for the rich,

2. continuous lies from bush and cheney and rumsfeld.

3. forcing democracy on a people who don't know or care what it is. all the while keeping an eye on that oil.

4. lack of leadership. using erroneous facts to make decisions, having no plans for iraq once the government there was overthrown.

5.playing at law and order, but commuting a sentence for his boy libby, saying the 250,000 dollar fine for libby was substantial. a quarter of a million for people of that economic class is like 20 dollars is to me. then blaming it on clinton saying that the ex-slimeball did worse.

6. using 9/11 as an excuse for reducing the liberties of millions of innocent people. using 9/11 to start a war that has killed many thousands of people while waving the flag patriotically and hoping that we will forget what he didn't do in rvn.


thanks gwb

2007-07-07 10:03:02 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Assistant to a attorney....

2007-07-07 09:59:46 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

Link of all involved: (PDF)
http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20070316173308-19288.pdf

2007-07-07 09:58:33 · 15 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics

It's a long article. Skim it over, read what interests you, then answer this question. Did we invade Iraq for the oil and use Saddam as an excuse?
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2005/crudedesigns.htm#pumping
Take a look at this also. This is from day two of Operation Iraqi Freedom showing we had control of almost all of their oil and infrastructure.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraqi_freedom_d2.htm
Do you still think it was to liberate Iraq from Saddam or to liberate Iraq from its oil?

2007-07-07 09:49:23 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Are you unaware that our founding fathers believed government should only provide that which can not be provided by ourselves?

2007-07-07 09:46:46 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

That is not a joke question.

I currently do Medical Transcription and am looking for a new career change and I cannot obtain medical licenses because of my felon status and so I cannot work in the medical field.

2007-07-07 09:41:06 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics