<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Law Offices of Vince Manapat | Art &amp; Entertainment Law Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/comments/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com</link>
	<description>A Review of Law Affecting the Arts Industry in New York City</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 18:08:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Author Gets Caught Plagiarizing, Defends on Grounds that She Belongs to a Generation of Plagiarists by Kathleen Rose</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/582/comment-page-1#comment-3126</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathleen Rose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 18:08:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=582#comment-3126</guid>
		<description></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Legal Ethics and Copyright: A Comment on Lawrence Lessig&#8217;s New Repulic Article by misha</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3114</link>
		<dc:creator>misha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:04:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=566#comment-3114</guid>
		<description>Generally, I agree with the conclusion. All change must come from the creator. Esentially, the open source movement started with software developers not willing to abide by corporate regulations of closing and partitioning information (code in this case). History has repeatedly shown that no regulation can really control natural progression of the development of collective intelligence. Such regulations are always temporary, yet very destructive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Generally, I agree with the conclusion. All change must come from the creator. Esentially, the open source movement started with software developers not willing to abide by corporate regulations of closing and partitioning information (code in this case). History has repeatedly shown that no regulation can really control natural progression of the development of collective intelligence. Such regulations are always temporary, yet very destructive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Filmmakers, Crowdfunding, and Securities Law: A Cautionary Tale by uberVU - social comments</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/523/comment-page-1#comment-2728</link>
		<dc:creator>uberVU - social comments</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=523#comment-2728</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Social comments and analytics for this post...&lt;/strong&gt;

This post was mentioned on Twitter by sponso_RING: Filmmakers, Crowdfunding, and Securities Law: The Basics &#124; The Law ...: Most filmmakers are surprised to learn that sec http://url4.eu/16Xml...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Social comments and analytics for this post&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>This post was mentioned on Twitter by sponso_RING: Filmmakers, Crowdfunding, and Securities Law: The Basics | The Law &#8230;: Most filmmakers are surprised to learn that sec <a href="http://url4.eu/16Xml.." rel="nofollow">http://url4.eu/16Xml..</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Giving Your Content Away For Free by Caio Fernandes</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/486/comment-page-1#comment-2700</link>
		<dc:creator>Caio Fernandes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 15:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=486#comment-2700</guid>
		<description>i can&#039;t believe there is people that still listen what Bonno has to say . 
 if i want obvious crap , i would watch tv .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i can&#8217;t believe there is people that still listen what Bonno has to say .<br />
 if i want obvious crap , i would watch tv .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Art Merchant&#8221; Under New York Law by Teresa DeChant</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/377/comment-page-1#comment-2687</link>
		<dc:creator>Teresa DeChant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=377#comment-2687</guid>
		<description>Great article!

I purchased Wesselmann prints from Karla Mackay many years ago before the divorce. I hope Tom Wesslemann got paid...he is a wonderful artist.

Are there records of purchases by dealers that can be accessed. I also bought from Charles Foley, Columbus, Ohio a Wesselmann and need to have the purchase documented for the provenance.  Teresa DeChant  216 276 0086</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article!</p>
<p>I purchased Wesselmann prints from Karla Mackay many years ago before the divorce. I hope Tom Wesslemann got paid&#8230;he is a wonderful artist.</p>
<p>Are there records of purchases by dealers that can be accessed. I also bought from Charles Foley, Columbus, Ohio a Wesselmann and need to have the purchase documented for the provenance.  Teresa DeChant  216 276 0086</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Terminating John Steinbeck&#8217;s Copyright Grants by Entertainment Law Update Podcast, Epsiode 6 &#8211; Celebrity Identity Theft &#124; Entertainment Law Update Podcast</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/37/comment-page-1#comment-1802</link>
		<dc:creator>Entertainment Law Update Podcast, Epsiode 6 &#8211; Celebrity Identity Theft &#124; Entertainment Law Update Podcast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=37#comment-1802</guid>
		<description>[...] http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/37 Steinbeck estate issues [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] <a href="http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/37" rel="nofollow">http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/37</a> Steinbeck estate issues [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Mailing Yourself Something Does Not Amount To Incontrovertible Proof of Copyright: A Tale of Copyright Fraud by Emily</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/456/comment-page-1#comment-565</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 22:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=456#comment-565</guid>
		<description>Hear hear, I&#039;m so sick of reading articles and posts advising people that poor man&#039;s copyright is a secure way to protect your work! What about online registration with  a webite that uses digital fingerprinting, do you think that would hold up in court? I&#039;ve been using http://www.digiprove.com/ which seems to be a good service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hear hear, I&#8217;m so sick of reading articles and posts advising people that poor man&#8217;s copyright is a secure way to protect your work! What about online registration with  a webite that uses digital fingerprinting, do you think that would hold up in court? I&#8217;ve been using <a href="http://www.digiprove.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.digiprove.com/</a> which seems to be a good service.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Mailing Yourself Something Does Not Amount To Incontrovertible Proof of Copyright: A Tale of Copyright Fraud by Copyright proof by postmark not the best evidence</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/456/comment-page-1#comment-550</link>
		<dc:creator>Copyright proof by postmark not the best evidence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 01:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=456#comment-550</guid>
		<description>[...] Go to article &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Go to article &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Mailing Yourself Something Does Not Amount To Incontrovertible Proof of Copyright: A Tale of Copyright Fraud by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/456/comment-page-1#comment-549</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=456#comment-549</guid>
		<description>Is this the Mike Cho I think it is? I hope so.

Court&#039;s may allow for the poor man&#039;s copyright by accepting the sealed envelopes into evidence (assuming the law of evidence in a particular jurisdiction allows for it). So in a sense, the court does allow for the poor man&#039;s copyright. 

The question is then, once admitted into evidence, how compelling is evidence of something being mailed to yourself? How persuasive is this evidence? The answer is that this evidence is worth very little. This is problematic because there are still people out there who think that once they mail a work to themselves they are protected from infringement, which is not the case.

If this is the Mike Cho I think it is, email me at vincemanapat@gmail.com and let me know what you&#039;re up to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is this the Mike Cho I think it is? I hope so.</p>
<p>Court&#8217;s may allow for the poor man&#8217;s copyright by accepting the sealed envelopes into evidence (assuming the law of evidence in a particular jurisdiction allows for it). So in a sense, the court does allow for the poor man&#8217;s copyright. </p>
<p>The question is then, once admitted into evidence, how compelling is evidence of something being mailed to yourself? How persuasive is this evidence? The answer is that this evidence is worth very little. This is problematic because there are still people out there who think that once they mail a work to themselves they are protected from infringement, which is not the case.</p>
<p>If this is the Mike Cho I think it is, email me at <a href="mailto:vincemanapat@gmail.com">vincemanapat@gmail.com</a> and let me know what you&#8217;re up to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Mailing Yourself Something Does Not Amount To Incontrovertible Proof of Copyright: A Tale of Copyright Fraud by MikeCho</title>
		<link>http://www.vincemanapat.com/index.php/archives/456/comment-page-1#comment-547</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeCho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vincemanapat.com/?p=456#comment-547</guid>
		<description>Vincent P.  =)

Just bored at work and perusing through sites and I find this... Your example shows how someone got caught.  Isn&#039;t that evidence for allowing such 
&#039;poor man&#039; copyright protocol?  

Hope you&#039;re doing well, man.

-Mike m.f. Cho</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vincent P.  =)</p>
<p>Just bored at work and perusing through sites and I find this&#8230; Your example shows how someone got caught.  Isn&#8217;t that evidence for allowing such<br />
&#8216;poor man&#8217; copyright protocol?  </p>
<p>Hope you&#8217;re doing well, man.</p>
<p>-Mike m.f. Cho</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
