text:
Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevil290hopk).pdf/9

 period of development of the larvæ varies greatly. Those more fortunate in securing a continuous food supply may become fully developed before some of the less fortunate ones in the same terminal are one-fourth as large, although the eggs from which both came may have been deposited at about the same time. There is also a wide range in the period of transformation to the pupa and adults and again in the emergence of the latter. Thus, if the first eggs are deposited about the 8th of May at Milford, Pa., latitude 41° 20′, altitude 500 to 1,000 feet, the first eggs will begin to hatch about the 14th of May, the first larvæ will be full grown about July 8, the first transformations to the pupæ will take place about the 15th of July, the first adults will begin to emerge about July 25, and adults will continue to come out until the first part of September. Practically all will be out by September 15. The principal period of emergence, however, is from about the 25th of July to the middle of August.

The white pine is the tree normally attacked, but the weevil is occasionally found in the terminals or topmost branches of the native and cultivated spruces, the jack pine, and very rarely in the pitch pine or other eastern pines. The attack is confined to the small to large sapling and pole stage in the development of the tree.

Our records indicate that this weevil follows the natural range of the white pine from southwestern North Carolina into New Brunswick and Canada and westward into Wisconsin.

The first evidence of attack on the living terminals is the exudation of fresh, clear, and shining drops of resin. Upon closer examination fresh pinhole-like punctures are found in the bark (fig. 3), and at the same time the inconspicuous beetles may be found on the terminal; but upon the approach of the observer the beetles will often let go their foothold and fall to the ground, where they will feign death. In a few days after the first attack the injured terminals are infested with larvæ is the stunted, unhealthy appearance of the young growth at the tip, which will gradually die, the needles turning yellowish and later brownish.

The time of development of the broods to adults will be indicated by the first appearance of dead tips.

Old work of the weevil is evidenced by the presence of old dead ter-


text:
Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/41

 Rh out at sea!” He had clasped me by the arm. “Quick, to the Battery, they’ll need every man to-night, they’ll”

Then he sank back into his chair. His look changed again. The vision died out of his eyes.

“What was I saying?” he asked. “Ah, yes, this old brandy, a very special brand. They keep it for me here, a dollar a glass. They know me here,” he added in his fatuous way. “All the waiters know me. The head-waiter always knows me the minute I come into the room—keeps a chair for me. Now try this brandy and then presently we’ll move on and see what’s doing at some of the shows.”

But somehow, in spite of himself, my companion seemed to be unable to bring himself fully back into the consciousness of the scene before him. The far-away look still lingered in his eyes.

Presently he turned and spoke to me in a low, confidential tone.

“Was I talking to myself a moment ago?” he asked. “Yes? Ah, I feared I was. Do you know—I don’t mind telling it to you—lately I’ve had a strange, queer feeling that comes over me at times, as if something were happening—something, I don’t know what. I suppose,” he continued, with a false attempt

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/41


text:
Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/45

 Rh WAR! The President’s message is for WAR! Late extra! WAR! WAR!”

And I knew that a great nation had cast aside the bonds of sloth and luxury, and was girding itself to join in the fight for the free democracy of all mankind.

title: Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/45


text:
Category:Authors in EB1911

Author pages in this category have an entry in the EB1911

title: Category:Authors in EB1911


text:
Category:Authors in DMM

Author pages in this category have an entry in the Dictionary of Music and Musicians

title: Category:Authors in DMM


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevil290hopk).pdf/10


text: Frenzied Fiction/Father Knickerbocker: A Fantasy


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/116

Kaku to dani Eyawa Ibuki no Sashi-mogusa Sashimo shiraji na Moyuru omoi wo.


text:
Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/46

Eminent Authority looked round at the little group of us seated about him at the club. He was telling us, or beginning to tell us, about the outcome of the war. It was a thing we wanted to know. We were listening attentively. We felt that we were “getting something.”

“I doubt very much,” he said, “whether Downing Street realizes the enormous power which the Quai d’Orsay has over the Yildiz Kiosk.”

“So do I,” I said, “what is it?”

But he hardly noticed the interruption.

“You’ve got to remember,” he went on, “that, from the point of view of the Yildiz, the Wilhelmstrasse is just a thing of yesterday.”

“Quite so,” I said.

“Of course,” he added, “the Ballplatz is quite different.”

“Altogether different,” I admitted.

“And mind you,” he said, “the Ballplatz

title: Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/46


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/118

Akenureba Kururu mono to wa Shiri nagara Nao urameshiki Asaborake kana.


text: Category:Authors with biographical entries


text:
Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/54

 Rh “I wonder how many of these submarines Germany has, anyway?”

And then we drifted back into the humbler kind of war talk that we have been carrying on for three years.

But later, as we walked home together, Rapley said to me:

“That fellow threw a lot of light on things in Europe, didn’t he?”

And I answered:

“Yes.”

What liars we all are!

title: Page:Frenzied Fiction.djvu/54


text:
Author:Edward Kelly

 * Edward Kelly (1854–1880), Australian bushranger
 * Edward Kelly (1876–1937), Canadian Roman Catholic priest

title: Author:Edward Kelly


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/120

Nageki-tsutsu Hitori nuru yo no Akuru ma wa Ikani hisashiki Mono to kawa shiru.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/122

Wasureji no Yukusue made wa Katakereba Kyō wo kagiri no Inochi tomo gana.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/124

Taki no oto wa Taete hisashiku Narinuredo Na koso nagarete Nao kikoe kere.


text:
Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/11

 did they finalize any other details about the possible future show.

At some point during the Canal Zone show at Gagosian, Celle learned that Cariou’s photographs wert “in the show with Richard Prince.” Celle then phoned Cariou and, when he did not respond, Celle mistakenly concluded that he was “doing something with Richard Prince …. [Maybe] he’s not pursuing me because he’s doing something better, bigger with this person…. [H]e didn’t want to tell the French aid I’m not doing it with you, you know, because we had started a relation and that would have been bad.” Celle Dep. 88:15–89:7, Jan. 26, 2010. At that point, Celle decided that she would not put on a “Rasta show” because it had been “done already,” and that any future Cariou exhibition she put on would be of photographs from Surfers. Celle remained interested in exhibiting prints from Surfers, but Cariou never followed through.

According to Cariou, he learned about the Gagosian Canal Zone show from Celle in December 2008. On December 30, 2008, he sued Prince, the Gagosian Gallery, and Lawrence Gagosian, raising claims of copyright infringement. See 17 U.S.C. §§ 106, 501. The defendants asserted a fair use defense, arguing that Prince’s artworks are transformative of Cariou’s photographs and, accordingly, do not violate Cariou’s copyrights. See, e.g., Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 578–79, 114 S.Ct. 1164, 127 L.Ed.2d 500 (1994). Ruling on the parties’ subsequently-filed cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court (Batts, J.) “impose[d] a requirement that the new work in some way comment on, relate to the historical context of, or critically refer back to the original works” in order to be qualify as fair use, and stated that “Prince’s Paintings are transformative only to the extent that they comment on the Photos.” Cariou v. Prince, 784 F.Supp.2d 337, 348–49 (S.D.N.Y.2011). The court concluded that “Prince did not intend to comment on Cariou, on Cariou’s Photos, or on aspects of popular culture closely associated with Cariou or the Photos when he appropriated the Photos,” id. at 349, and for that reason rejected the defendants’ fair use defense and granted summary judgment to Cariou. The district court also granted sweeping injunctive relief, ordering the defendants to “deliver up for impounding, destruction, or other disposition, as [Cariou] determines, all infringing copies of the Photographs, including the Paintings and unsold copies of the Canal Zone exhibition book, in their possession.” Id. at 355. This appeal followed.

“We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. See Blanch v. Koons, 467 F.3d 244, 249–50 (2d Cir.2006). The well known standards for summary judgment set forth in Rule 56(c) apply. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. “Although fair use is a mixed question of law and fact, this court has on numerous occasions resolved fair use determinations at the summary judgment stage where … there are no genuine issues of material fact.” Blanch, 467 F.3d at 250 (quotation marks and brackets omitted); see also Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539, 560, 105 S.Ct. 2218, 85 L.Ed.2d 588 (1985); Castle Rock Entm’t, Inc. v. Carol Publ’g Grp., Inc., 150 F.3d 132, 137 (2d Cir.1998). This case lends itself to that approach.

title: Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/11


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/126

Arazaramu Kono yo no hoka no Omoide ni Ima hito tabi no Au koto mo gana.


text:
Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevil290hopk).pdf/11

 minals in the forks of the young trees (fig. 4), and the results of their work will be evident in the deformed growth, large forks, and broad, low crowns of both young and old trees (fig. 5).

The damage and loss, as affecting the commercial tree, consists not only in the death of the terminal shoots, but in subsequent abnormal development of the trees so injured. The dying of the leading shoot throws the next year's growth into the upper lateral shoots, which results in a forked and many-branched top. Each branch produces a vigorous terminal, and all compete for leadership in forming the crown. In the succeeding years the more vigorous terminals of the topmost branches are attacked and killed, causing more branches, and thus effectually preventing the development of the normal straight trunk and symmetrical crown necessary to a tree of commercial value.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/128

Meguri-aite Mishi ya sore tomo Wakanu ma ni Kumo gakure nishi Yowa no tsuki kana.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/130

Arima yama Ina no sasawara Kaze fukeba Ide soyo hito wo Wasure yawa suru.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/132

Yasurawade Nenamaji mono wo Sayofukete Katabuku made no Tsuki wo mishi kana.


text:
Page:Hundredversesfro00fujiuoft.djvu/134

Ohoye yama Ikuno no michi no Tohokereba Mada fumi mo mizu Ama-no-Hashidate.


text: The White-Pine Weevil (Hopkins)

title: The White-Pine Weevil (Hopkins)


text:
Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/12

The purpose of the copyright law is “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts….” U.S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 8. As Judge Pierre Leval of this court has explained, “[t]he copyright is not an inevitable, divine, or natural right that confers on authors the absolute ownership of their creations. It is designed rather to stimulate activity and progress in the arts for the intellectual enrichment of the public.” Pierre N. Leval, Toward a Fair Use Standard, 108 Harv. L.Rev. 1105, 1107 (1990) (hereinafter “Leval”). Fair use is “necessary to fulfill [that] very purpose.” Campbell, 510 U.S. at 575, 114 S.Ct. 1164. Because “ ‘excessively broad protection would stifle, rather than advance, the law’s objective,’ ” fair use doctrine “mediates between” “the property rights [copyright law] establishes in creative works, which must be protected up to a point, and the ability of authors, artists, and the rest of us to express them—or ourselves by reference to the works of others, which must be protected up to a point.” Blanch, 467 F.3d at 250 (brackets omitted) (quoting Leval at 1109).

The doctrine was codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, which lists four non-exclusive factors that must be considered in determining fair use. Under the statute,

"[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work … for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
 * (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
 * (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
 * (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
 * (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

17 U.S.C. § 107. As the statute indicates, and as the Supreme Court and our court have recognized, the fair use determination is an open-ended and context-sensitive inquiry. Campbell, 510 U.S. at 577–78, 114 S.Ct. 1164; Blanch, 467 F.3d at 251. The statute “employs the terms ‘including’ and ‘such as’ in the preamble paragraph to indicate the illustrative and not limitative function of the examples given, which thus provide only general guidance about the sorts of copying that courts and Congress most commonly had found to be fair uses.” Campbell, 510 U.S. at 577–78, 114 S.Ct. 1164 (quotation marks and citation omitted). The “ultimate test of fair use … is whether the copyright law’s goal of ‘promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ … would be better served by allowing the use than by preventing it.” Castle Rock, 150 F.3d at 141 (brackets and citation omitted).

The first statutory factor to consider, which addresses the manner in which the copied work is used, is “[t]he heart of the fair use inquiry.” Blanch, 467 F.3d at 251. We ask whether the new work merely ‘supersedes the objects’ of the original creation, or instead adds something new, with a further purpose or different character, altering the first with new expression, meaning, or message[,] … in other words, whether and to what extent the new work is transformative. … [T]ransformative works … lie at the heart of

title: Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/12


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/3


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/2


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/1


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/4


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/38


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/37


text: Page:The white-pine weevil (IA whitepineweevi221maca).pdf/36


text: Page:Some recent developments in white pine weevil research in the northeast (IA CAT31009844).pdf/2


text:
Page:The Necromancer, or, The Tale of the Black Forest Vol. 2.djvu/63

 contemplate the horrors of my dreary abode, the walls of which were blackened by the hand of time, and overgrown with moss; muddy straw spread on the damp ground served me for a couch, and the faint glimmering of a lamp heightened the horrors of my dungeon; the thick corrupted air made it difficult to fetch breath, to which were added most excruciating pains, not in the least alleviated by the use of brandy, but rather increased on account of the sores my poor frame was covered with; only the agony of my tortured mind surpassed the sufferings of my body; futurity stared me grisly in the face, and the consciousness of being in the power of a set of villains, who would either sacrifice my life, to their thirst of blood, or force me, by threats and exquisite torments, to commit deeds of the most attrocious nature, filled my mind with dreadful apprehensions.

I remained two days in a state of unspeakable despondency; although my bodily pains


text:
Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/13

 the fair use doctrine’s guarantee of breathing space…. Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164 (citations and some quotation marks omitted) (quoting Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342, 348 *No. 4,901) (C.C.D.Mass.1841) (Story, J.). “If ‘the secondary use adds value to the original—if [the original work] is used as raw material, transformed in the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings—this is the very type of activity that the fair use doctrine intends to protect for the enrichment of society.’ ” Castle Rock, 150 F.3d at 142 (quoting Leval 1111). For a use to be fair, it “must be productive and must employ the quoted matter in a different manner or for a different purpose from the original.” Leval at 1111.

The district court imposed a requirement that, to qualify for a fair use defense, a secondary use must “comment on, relate to the historical context of, or critically refer back to the original works.” Cariou, 784 F.Supp.2d at 348. Certainly, many types of fair use, such as satire and parody, invariably comment on an original work and/or on popular culture. For example, the rap group 2 Live Crew’s parody of Roy Orbison’s “Oh, Pretty Woman” “was clearly intended to ridicule the white-bread original.” Campbell, 510 U.S. at 582, 114 S.Ct. 1164 (quotation marks omitted). Much of Andy Warhol’s work, including work incorporating appropriated images of Campbell’s soup cans or of Marilyn Monroe, comments on consumer culture and explores the relationship between celebrity culture and advertising. As even Cariou concedes, however, the district court’s legal premise was not correct. The law imposes no requirement that a work comment on the original or its author in order to be considered transformative, and a secondary work may constitute a fair use even if it serves some purpose other than those (criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research) identified in the preamble to the statute. Id. at 577, 114 S.Ct. 1164; Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 561, 105 S.Ct. 2218. Instead, as the Supreme Court as well as decisions from our court have emphasized, to qualify as a fair use, a new work generally must alter the original with “new expression, meaning, or message.” Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164; see also Blanch, 467 F.3d at 253 (original must be employed “in the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings” (quotation marks omitted)); Castle Rock, 150 F.3d at 142.

Here, our observation of Prince’s artworks themselves convinces us of the transformative nature of all but five, which we discuss separately below. These twenty-five of Prince’s artworks manifest an entirely different aesthetic from Cariou’s photographs. Where’ Cariou's serene and deliberately composed portraits and landscape photographs depict the natural beauty of Rastafarians and their surrounding environs, Prince’s crude and jarring works, on the other hand, are hectic and provocative. Cariou’s black-and-white photographs were printed in a 9 1/2″ × 12″ book. Prince has created collages on canvas that incorporate color, feature distorted human and other forms and settings, and measure between ten and nearly a hundred times the size of the photographs. Prince’s composition, presentation, scale, color palette, and media are fundamentally different and new compared to the photographs, as is the expressive nature of Prince’s work. See Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164.

Prince’s deposition testimony further demonstrates his drastically different approach and aesthetic from Cariou’s. Prince testified that he “[doesn’t] have any really interest in what [another artist’s]

title: Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/13


text:
Page:Everywoman's World, Volume 7, Number 7.djvu/3

Vol. VII., No. 7 EDITORIAL JULY, 1917

AM asked, without myself choosing the title, to write on the topic at the head of this editorial. There is no doubt that Canada is young, and it is well, when we are tempted to be depressed by our defects, to remember this truth. As a nation, indeed, Canada can hardly be regarded as fifty years young; fifty yearrs ago few thought of Canada as a nation at all. It was a colony, and even its leaders were pervaded by what we may call the colonial spirit; something which we have not yet fully outgrown. Fifty years ago there was no murmuring in respect to the control of Canada's external affairs by Great Britain; and no complaint because no Canadian officer was fit to command the Canadian forces. It was still true that a Governor-General might, of his own motion, pardon a criminal, even in opposition to the advice of his ministers. In a deeper sense, too, Canada lacked and real sense of nationality. Nova Scotians thought Ontario a remote country and, for years after 1867, spoke of "going up to Canada." There was Canadian West; that part of the country was the property of the Hudson's Bay Company. There was no Canadian Province of British Columbia; to reach that remote land one had to cross interminable prairie land and mountains, and the connecting railway did not come until nearly twenty years later. A nation, like an individual, is, I suppose, as young, as it feels. Canada assuredly has no right to feel old. Before her lies the hopeful, cheery view of life that belongs to youth.

Fifty Years Ago Canada was barely conscious of haying any serious problems in respect to social evolution. She had solved the one great problem of linking together in a single state obscure and detached provinces. It was a magnificent achievement, worthy of all praise, and until it was performed great national questions could not be considered as they hardly yet existed. Toronto was in those days a small, quiet, pleasant city, with little more than fifty thousand inhabitants, a place about one-third the size of the present Vancouver. No doubt it seemed very backward to visitors from large centres. No doubt, too, it was thoroughly provincial in its politics, in its education, in its art, and in its literature. But, at least, it was free from some of the pressing problems which now confront all Canadian cities. There was no foreign population, bringing to the new world the type of social life forced on the common people by selfish oppression in Europe; there was no acute strife between labour and capital; capital was modest and labour was content, for, with cheap food and low rents, it was not hard to live decently. No doubt Toronto then, being provincial in spirit, copied the social cleavage of the old world, and divisions in social standing were sharper than they are at the present day. Fifty years young, as we now are, in this and other great cities we are confronted with the problem of the foreigner, the problem of the slums, the problem of high prices and sometimes of low wages, the problem of enervating luxury, the problem of selfish capital and of not less selfish labour. Assuredly the fifty years have brought us enough to think about and enough to do.

A Young Nation should face its Problems in hope. Youth that is not hopeful is not youth at all. Hope is greatly needed, for it is melancholy to reflect that no civilization has as yet proved a real success. To be successful a civilization must, at least, provide for a decent plenty of the necessaries of life for all classes of its people. Three hundred and fifty years before Christ, Aristotle said that in the society of his time there were really only two classes, the rich and the poor. The problems of society at that time was to soften this cleavage. In all the intervening centuries we have not solved it, The "Merrie England" of the Middle Ages was a country in which there was dire poverty, plague, and starvation. The England of to-day is a land in which one-quarter of the mothers who bring children into the world suffer from lack of food. It is not so bad as that in Canada. But in our youthful eagerness we must not forget the shadow and we must have a firm resolve that it shall not darken our life as it does that of older lands.

We are Trying in Canada to Work Democracy. Democracy, I suppose, chiefly means that what the people wish to have in the way oi government they will have power to secure. If they wish high things they will aim at them, if they wish low things they will fall to them. The young are often ready to take great risks. Youth has a buoyant confidence that, in the end, all will be well. No doubt mankind is very tough and can stand a heavy strain. Intellectual people, however, should remember that dangers lie in the path of every democracy, that ignorant people are never wise people and that if we leave our people ignorant we also keep them foolish. Education in right thinking will alone save a democracy. In Canada the greatest forces of education are in the hands of the women. Not only do women give the chief teaching in the home, but our schools are chiefly, in some districts wholly, dependent on woman teachers. By women will be determined, in large measure, the quality of the democracy which we mature.

Canada is a difficult country to govern. Scattered in a vast region, extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific, are living less than eight million people, fewer than are to be found in the State of New York alone. To create any kind of unity among these people, to instruct them in the vital problems of citizenship, to appeal to them in such a way that they will act together, is a problem of almost overwhelming difficulty. When we add to this, certain questions of race which stand in the way of mutual understanding, we shall need all the hopefulness that we can summon to our help. The French in Quebec, almost one-quarter of our population, speak a different language and have a different religion from that of the majority in other parts of Canada. In our North-West there are tens of thousands of aliens, reared in conditions totally different from ours. It is out of these varied elements that we are to create a united people. I am glad that women are to help in this work for, to perform the task, we shall need woman's tact united with man's strength and resolution.

Not Only is Our Future Difficult, but it is hampered by our past record. I hope that the women of Canada will realize that the politics of Canada are on a very low level. It is my conviction that in no other of the larger self-governing states of the British Empire are politics so degraded as they are in Canada. Here a few people divide among them vast natural resources, and there is a scramble for the good things which the Government controls. Determined men, by any methods that would work, have forced from its concessions that required.

From the first, party feeling in Canada was bitter, and designing men have used the bondage of the people to party to further their own ends. Public charters, privileges which could only be granted by Government, appointments to office, everything that could be wrung from a party in power have been made the objects of political influence. This is one of the penalties of youth. In England, at one time, things were as bad, possibly even worse. England, however, as she has grown old and experienced, has invented safeguards against such abuses. One of the most urgent problems in Canada now is to do the same thing and to see that political influence is used for the public good and not for private gain.

The system which a young country tolerates is known as the patronage system. I invite women to make war on this system from the outset, now that they have political power. It is the most accursed thing in our national life. In every constituency in Canada the favours which lie within the power of the Government are placed in the hands of the sitting member if he supports the Government, or in the hands of the defeated candidate who would have supported it, had he succeeded. Purchases to be made for the Government, public works created by Government, the building of roads, everything that the Government does, all are determined, not on the basis of efficiency, but on that of spending the money for the benefit of those who will support the Government. Appointments to office, except what is called the inside Civil Service at Ottawa, are determined in the same way. Not the man who can best do the work is appointed, but the man who has best served party interests. It has happened that millions of dollars of the public endowment have been wasted because of the patronage system forbade the appointment of an efficient man when an inefficient one had a party claim to the job. No country that is grown up politically would tolerate such a system. Truly Canada is fifty years young when she endures it.

The Confederation of Canada fifty years ago, has not cured this terrible evil, but it has cured some other things, Undoubtedly in a very real sense the Federated Provinces now constitute a nation with a vital sense of unity. Halifax, on the Atlantic, has a great many things in common with Victoria, on the Pacific—the same British ideals and traditions, the same interests in a great political system, a similarity of social conditions, religious life on the same lines, and many other evidences of a common origin. Toronto, Winnipeg, and Vancouver are in a hundred ways alike. The free movement from East to West has prevented isolation and resulted in the creation of a common type of personality which may be called Canadian. The statesmen of fifty years ago would be astonished if they could see to-day the consequences of their pioneer work. Perhaps we have not as many people as they hoped we should have, for they dreamed the dreams of optimists. Even so, one imagines that Winnipeg and Vancouver would startle them. As concrete realities of Confederation the most startling experience for them would be to know our thoughts at the present time. Plunged as we are in a great war, afflicted with grievous losses on the battlefields of Europe, we are confident and undaunted because we know we are fighting the battle of liberty for mankind. Detached provinces could not have done what Confederation has enabled us to do. We are playing a real part in a world movement. Our horizon is widened. We are thinking, as never before we thought, of the meaning of our British Citizenship. In this connection, the great Oriental Empire of India has come vitally within the range of our thought. We are pondering the meaning of the world Empire which the British peoples have created, we are wondering on what basis we shall stand together for the future, and are resolved that this amazing creation shall not perish. Fifty years of Confederation has done this for us. They have changed a colonial outlook into one Imperial, world-wide. It remains to us to rise to the full meaning of the change.

It may be that posterity will find the most momentous change in this fifty years to be that in the status of woman. This is the outcome of the struggle for liberty, the most striking political characteristic of the last half-century. To-day, over the greater part of Canada, woman is the political equal of man. How startled would the Fathers of Confederation be at this result! It is well, too, to remember that the final impulse in the movement has come to us from the new West, which the East so complacently thought to be its child. In the world of ideas it is now truer that the West rules the East than that the East rules the West, and as the first fruit of this rule we have the widespread prohibition of the liquor traffic and the emancipation of woman. The half-century which has done this has done much.

It Remains for us all, especially for woman, to turn opportunity into achievement. A new world of possibilities lies before us. If I might offer a word of counsel to woman as to her political duty, I would say, "Hold aloof from adherence to either Canadian party until that pledges itself to the cure of certain existing evils." Woman is too dignified, too noble a creation to be the sport of political faction or a sharer in the evils of which our present party system is guilty. I hope the women will not undertake too much at the outset. To destroy the patronage system is a sufficient task for them until it is achieved. Let them concentrate on this far-reaching reform and decent Canadian citizenship will rise up and call them blessed.


text:
Page:Some recent developments in white pine weevil research in the northeast (IA CAT31009844).pdf/3

ASTERN white pine is one of the most important sawtimber species in the Northeast. This species would have still greater potential value were it not for the white-pine weevil. Pissodes strobi (Peck), its most notorious insect pest. This is a native insect that occurs throughout the range of eastern white pine. A large percentage of the white pines in natural stands and plantations have been attacked once or more; and the crooks or forks that result from the attack greatly reduce the quality and quantity of timber that such stands produce.

The size of the loss is merchantable volume of standing white pine caused by the white-pine weevil was revealed in a study made in New Hampshire (6). The average volume 1


text: Page:Everywoman's World, Volume 7, Number 7.djvu/1


text:
Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/14

 original intent is because … what I do is I completely try to change it into something that’s completely different. … I’m trying to make a kind of fantastic, absolutely hip, up to date, contemporary take on the music scene.” Prince Dep. 338:4–339:3, Oct. 6, 2009. As the district court determined, Prince’s Canal Zone artworks relate to a “post-apocalyptic screenplay” Prince had planned, and “emphasize themes [of Prince’s planned screenplay] of equality of the sexes; highlight ‘the three relationships in the world, which are men and women, men and men, and women and women’; and portray a contemporary take on the music scene.” Cariou, 784 F.Supp.2d at 349; see Prince Dep. 339:3–7, Oct. 6, 2009.

The district court based its conclusion that Prince’s work is not transformative in large part on Prince’s deposition testimony that he “do[es]n’t really have a message,” that he was not “trying to create anything with a new meaning or a new message,” and that he “do[es]n’t have any … interest in [Cariou’s] original intent.” Cariou, 784 F.Supp.2d at 349; see Prince Dep. 45:25–46:2, 338:5–6, 360:18–20, Oct. 6, 2009. On appeal, Cariou argues that we must hold Prince to his testimony and that we are not to consider how Prince’s works may reasonably be perceived unless Prince claims that they were satire or parody. No such rule exists, and we do not analyze satire or parody differently from any other transformative use.

It is not surprising that, when transformative use is at issue, the alleged infringer would go to great lengths to explain and defend his use as transformative. Prince did not do so here. However, the fact that Prince did not provide those sorts of explanations in his deposition—which might have lent strong support to his defense—is not dispositive: What is critical is how the work in question appears to the reasonable observer, not simply what an artist might say about a particular piece or body of work. Prince’s work could be transformative even without commenting on Cariou’s work or on culture, and even without Prince’s stated intention to do so. Rather than confining our inquiry to Prince’s explanations of his artworks, we instead examine how the artworks may “reasonably be perceived” in order to assess their transformative nature. Campbell, 510 U.S. at 582, 114 S.Ct. 1164; Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 137 F.3d 109, 113–14 (2d Cir.1998) (evaluating parodic nature of advertisement in light of how it “may reasonably be perceived”). The focus of our infringement analysis is primarily on the Prince artworks themselves, and we see twenty-five of them as transformative as a matter of law.

In this respect, the Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in Brownmark Films, LLC v. Comedy Partners, 682 F.3d 687 (7th Cir.2012), is instructive. There, the court rejected the appellant’s argument that copyright infringement claims cannot be disposed of at the motion-to-dismiss stage, and affirmed the district court’s dismissal of such a claim under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Brownmark Films, 682 F.3d at 690. Considering whether an episode of the animated television show South Park presented a parody (and therefore a protected fair use) of a viral internet video titled “What What (In The Butt),” the court concluded that “[w]hen the two works … are viewed side-by-side, the South Park episode is clearly a parody of the original … video.” Id. at 692. For that reason, “the only two pieces of evidence needed to decide the question of fair use in [Brownmark were] the original version of [the video] and the episode at issue.” Id. at 690.

Here, looking at the artworks and the photographs side-by-side, we conclude

title: Page:Cariou v. Prince.pdf/14


text: Page:Some recent developments in white pine weevil research in the northeast (IA CAT31009844).pdf/1


text:
Jones v. Flowers

Petitioner Jones continued to pay the mortgage on his Arkansas home after separating from his wife and moving elsewhere in the same city. Once the mortgage was paid off, the property taxes—which had been paid by the mortgage company—went unpaid, and the property was certified as delinquent. Respondent Commissioner of State Lands mailed Jones a certified letter at the property's address, stating that unless he redeemed the property, it would be subject to public sale in two years. Nobody was home to sign for the letter and nobody retrieved it from the post office within 15 days, so it was returned to the Commissioner, marked "unclaimed." Two years later, the Commissioner published a notice of public sale in a local newspaper. No bids were submitted, so the State negotiated a private sale to respondent Flowers. Before selling the house, the Commissioner mailed another certified letter to Jones, which was also returned unclaimed. Flowers purchased the house and had an unlawful detainer notice delivered to the property. It was served on Jones' daughter, who notified him of the sale. He filed a state-court suit against respondents, alleging that the Commissioner's failure to provide adequate notice resulted in the taking of his property without due process. Granting respondents summary judgment, the trial court concluded that Arkansas' tax sale statute, which sets out the notice procedure used here, complied with due process. The State Supreme Court affirmed.

Held:

1. When mailed notice of a tax sale is returned unclaimed, a State must take additional reasonable steps to attempt to provide notice to the property owner before selling his property, if it is practicable to do so. Pp. 226–234.

(a) This Court has deemed notice constitutionally sufficient if it was reasonably calculated to reach the intended recipient when sent, see, e.g., Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314, but has never addressed whether due process requires further efforts when the government becomes aware prior to the taking that its notice attempt has failed. Most Courts of Appeals and State Supreme Courts addressing this question have decided that the government must do more in such a case, and many state statutes require more than mailed notice in the first instance. Pp. 226–228.

[p221] (b) The means a State employs to provide notice "must be such as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it." Mullane, 339 U.S., at 315. The adequacy of a particular form of notice is assessed by balancing the State's interest against "the individual interest sought to be protected by the Fourteenth Amendment." Id., at 314. Here, the evaluation concerns the adequacy of notice prior to the State's extinguishing a property owner's interest in a home. It is unlikely that a person who actually desired to inform an owner about an impending tax sale of a house would do nothing when a certified letter addressed to the owner is returned unclaimed. The sender would ordinarily attempt to resend the letter, if that is practical, especially given that it concerns the important and irreversible prospect of losing a house. The State may have made a reasonable calculation of how to reach Jones, but it had good reason to suspect when the notice was returned that Jones was no better off than if no notice had been sent. The government must consider unique information about an intended recipient regardless of whether a statutory scheme is reasonably calculated to provide notice in the ordinary case. See Robinson v. Hanrahan, 409 U.S. 38, 40 (per curiam), and Covey v. Town of Somers, 351 U.S. 141, 146–147. It does not matter that the State in each of those cases was aware of the information before it calculated the best way to send notice. Knowledge that notice was ineffective was one of the "practicalities and peculiarities of the case" taken into account, Mullane, supra, at 314–315, and it should similarly be taken into account in assessing the adequacy of notice here. The Commissioner and Solicitor General correctly note that the constitutionality of a particular notice procedure is assessed ex ante, not post hoc. But if a feature of the State's procedure is that it promptly provides additional information to the government about the effectiveness of attempted notice, the ex ante principle is not contravened by considering what the government does with that information. None of the Commissioner's additional contentions—that notice was sent to an address that Jones provided and had a legal obligation to keep updated, that a property owner who fails to receive a property tax bill and pay taxes is on inquiry notice that his property is subject to governmental taking, and that Jones was obliged to ensure that those in whose hands he left his property would alert him if it was in jeopardy—relieves the State of its constitutional obligation to provide adequate notice. Pp. 229–234.

2. Because additional reasonable steps were available to the State, given the circumstances here, the Commissioner's effort to provide notice to Jones was insufficient to satisfy due process. What is reasonable [p222] in response to new information depends on what that information reveals. The certified letter's return "unclaimed" meant either that Jones was not home when the postman called and did not retrieve the letter or that he no longer resided there. One reasonable step addressed to the former possibility would be for the State to resend the notice by regular mail, which requires no signature. Certified mail makes actual notice more likely only if someone is there to sign for the letter or tell the mail carrier that the address is incorrect. Regular mail can be left until the person returns home, and might increase the chances of actual notice. Other reasonable followup measures would have been to post notice on the front door or address otherwise undeliverable mail to "occupant." Either approach would increase the likelihood that any occupants would alert the owner, if only because an ownership change could affect their own occupancy. Contrary to Jones' claim, the Commissioner was not required to search the local phone book and other government records. Such an open-ended search imposes burdens on the State significantly greater than the several relatively easy options outlined here. The Commissioner's complaint about the burden of even these additional steps is belied by Arkansas' requirement that notice to homestead owners be accomplished by personal service if certified mail is returned and by the fact that the State transfers the cost of notice to the taxpayer or tax sale purchaser. The Solicitor General's additional arguments—that posted notice could be removed by children or vandals, and that the followup requirement will encourage States to favor modes of delivery that will not generate additional information—are rejected. This Court will not prescribe the form of service that Arkansas should adopt. Arkansas can determine how best to proceed, and the States have taken a variety of approaches. Pp. 234–238.

359 Ark. 443, 198 S.W.3d 520, reversed and remanded.

ROBERTS, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined, post, p. 239. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Michael T. Kirkpatrick argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Brian Wolfman.

Carter G. Phillips argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief for respondent Commissioner of State Lands was Virginia A. Seitz. A. J. Kelly filed a brief for respondent Flowers.

[p223] James A. Feldman argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae in support of respondents. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Clement, Acting Assistant Attorney General Katsas, Deputy Solicitor General Hungar, Michael Jay Singer, and Susan Maxson Lyons.

title: Jones v. Flowers