From: Adam Siegel <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 18:00:58 +0000 I wouldn't say Pallante was "correct." She submitted her views for the record here: http://copyright.gov/laws/testimonies/022615-testimony- pallante.pdf. Adam Adam Siegel Bibliographer for Languages, Literatures, and Performing Arts Agricultural and Resource Economics Librarian University of California, Davis Davis CA 95616 http://people.lib.ucdavis.edu/~apsiegel/ ________________________________________ From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 21:51:21 -0400 It's good that the temperature on this debate is dropping, but I don't see the underlying issue being engaged: Isn't Pallante correct that the Copyright Office belongs elsewhere, preferably in the Department of Commerce? It sounds like Hayden is protecting her turf, as most people would want to do, but the substantive issue here is still not being addressed. Joe Esposito On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:42 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 20:31:12 -0400 > > Here's a fresh posting that outlines a sensible interpretation of the > developments at LC. > > https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161031/16531435930/ conspiracy-theories-run-amock-over-copyright-office-executive-changes.shtml