Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Book ‘em: Feds threaten small publisher with six-figure fines over obsolete law" video.

Leonard Chornomaz What you're basically trying to say is that every bureaucrat, in existence, has a full and deep understanding of the law. That it is impossible for them to misinterpret the laws or use the laws to justify their position as a bureaucrat. Of course, he has to challenge what he's being charged with. Bureaucrats aren't lawyers. It's entirely possible that he's being charged by an individual that has no understanding of what the law says. It may well be that he has no idea on what he's doing. Incompetent bureaucrats do exist, you know. They exist in every walk of life. I'm astounded that you actually feel that there is no way a bureaucrat could be wrong in his understanding of the law. Just accept what he says and take your lumps. Especially after I showed you that the copyright laws do NOT require one to copyright what one publishes. I showed you the exact statement from those who uphold those laws....and STILL you insist that they MUST be correct.
5
Leonard Chornomaz The copyright already exists. They used to ask for a copy of the material being copyrighted when one was applying. You're under no obligation, under the law, to apply for a copyright for anything you publish. Also, if it is true, as he claims, that no other publisher has ever heard of this law, then it would seem that this guy is being targeted for some egregious reason that we're not privy to. He's claiming that this law hasn't been applied in years, decades. If you can show that this is a part of every day procedure in the publishing business, TODAY, then you'd have a case. If he is correct, then this is just the actions of an arbitrary and autocratic bureaucrat and really doesn't serve the interests of anyone but that specific bureaucrat.
4
Leonard Chornomaz It would appear that he is going to challenge it in court. Also, I've never heard of a law that required you to copyright written material. Is that REALLY a law. We must apply to copyright everything we print? According to this, it isn't mandatory. This is a summary but it does link to the copyright law at the US Copyright Office. If that's so, then this guy did nothing wrong. https://www.stopfakes.gov/article?id=Do-I-Have-to-Register-My-Copyright-Claim
4
Leonard Chornomaz "Obviously there is a law" This is from YOUR comment. I've posted a link to where you can actually read the law for yourself and it says that you are NOT required to apply for a copyright for material that you publish. THAT is the law. Yet, you still insist that the law does exist. What am I to assume? You have no proof other than this guy is being taken to court. That's not proof. I've given proof that compelled copyright applications do not exist. All you've said that it MUST exist because this bureaucrat is charging him. I have to assume that you think bureaucrats are never wrong. Of the two of us, I have the stronger argument. Then you add what his lawyer said and all you have is the fact that the guy is being charged. You don't know the person that's behind the charge or what he's basing it on or even whether the person has the competence to understand what the law says or means or whether it even exists.
3