The renewable resources extension act /

Mode of access: Internet.

Patent term extension and pharmaceutical innovation [microform] : hearing before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-seventh Congress, second session, February 4, 1982.

"No. 155."

Glendo Unit of the Missouri River Basin Project Contract Extension Act of 2005 : report (to accompany S. 592).

"October 27, 2005."

Trade agreements extension act of 1951. Hearings before the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, Eighty-second Congress, first session, on H. R. 1612, an act to extend the authority of the President to enter into trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff act of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes.

Hearings held Feb. 22-Apr. 6, 1951.

Background information concerning the Emergency health insurance extension act of 1975 : background information /

At head of title: 94th Congress, 1st session. Committee print.

Fact sheet : Health professions educational assistance act of 1976 (PL 94-484): amended by Health services extension act of 1977 (PL 95-83, Title III) and Health professions education amendments of l977 (PL 95-215).

Mode of access: Internet.

The Life of an Author: Samuel Egerton Brydges and the Copyright Act 1814

The history of literary copyright in nineteenth century Britain is dominated - understandably perhaps - by a preoccupation with the passing and impact of the Copyright Amendment Act 1842, so ably lobbied for by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd. This article, however, draws attention away from the 1842 Act towards the Copyright Act 1814, the first legislative provision within British copyright law to introduce a lifetime term of protection for the author. Why and on what basis did the legislature do so?
In bringing a renewed attention to this often overlooked legislative measure, we consider the context and logic that underpinned to grant of a copyright term that was tethered to the life of the author. In doing so, we might also find a useful prism through which to look afresh at current copyright debates concerning the appropriate nature and scope of copyright protection in the 21st century.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1814

Legislation replacing the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) and providing that copyright in a literary work would last for twenty-eight years from the time of publication, but that ‘if the author shall be living' at the end of that period then the work was to be protected ‘for the residue of his natural life'.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular the controversy over the library deposit provision in the wake of the decision in Beckford v. Hood (1798) (uk_1798a). The commentary suggests that the introduction of the reversionary lifetime copyright term had more to do with the opportunistic and timely intervention of one Member of Parliament (Samuel Egerton Brydges) than with any principled or considered position adopted on the part of the legislature.

Commentary on Copyright Amendment Act 1842

The Act providing authors with the first post-mortem term of copyright protection. The term of copyright was to last either for the life of the author plus seven years after his or her death, or for forty-two years from the first publication of the same (whichever was longer). The commentary briefly discusses Thomas Noon Talfourd's repeated attempts to secure such legislation between 1837 and 1841, the opposition he experienced thereto (including Thomas Babington Macaulay's famous speech in the House of Commons on 5 February 1841 against extending the copyright term), and the success which Lord Mahon had in finally securing the Act in 1842.

Commentary on Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862

Legislation conferring copyright protection on paintings, drawings, and photographs for the life of the author plus a seven year post mortem term. The Act was also innovative in de-coupling the copyright term from the event of publication, in providing artists with a new form of ‘moral rights' protection, and in introducing the concept of "originality" as the standard threshold for copyright protection.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular, the international copyright regime, the nature of the art market in eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the role of the Society of Artists in lobbying for legislative protection, and the impetus which the International Exhibition provided for securing the same. The commentary also considers how the 1862 Bill, in its earliest incarnation, incorporated elements that would have signalled a radical departure from established copyright norms. In particular, the Bill proposed: that copyright protection should not be contingent upon registration; and that protection should be offered on a universal basis, regardless of an artists' nationality, and regardless of where the work in question was created.

A Randomized, Naturalistic, Parallel-Group Study for the Long-Term Treatment of Panic Disorder With Clonazepam or Paroxetine

This long-term extension of an 8-week randomized, naturalistic study in patients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia compared the efficacy and safety of clonazepam (n = 47) and paroxetine (n = 37) over a 3-year total treatment duration. Target doses for all patients were 2 mg/d clonazepam and 40 mg/d paroxetine (both taken at bedtime). This study reports data from the long-term period (34 months), following the initial 8-week treatment phase. Thus, total treatment duration was 36 months. Patients with a good primary outcome during acute treatment continued monotherapy with clonazepam or paroxetine, but patients with partial primary treatment success were switched to the combination therapy. At initiation of the long-term study, the mean doses of clonazepam and paroxetine were 1.9 (SD, 0.30) and 38.4 (SD, 3.74) mg/d, respectively. These doses were maintained until month 36 (clonazepam 1.9 [ SD, 0.29] mg/d and paroxetine 38.2 [SD, 3.87] mg/d). Long-term treatment with clonazepam led to a small but significantly better Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Improvement rating than treatment with paroxetine (mean difference: CGI-Severity scale -3.48 vs -3.24, respectively, P = 0.02; CGI-Improvement scale 1.06 vs 1.11, respectively, P = 0.04). Both treatments similarly reduced the number of panic attacks and severity of anxiety. Patients treated with clonazepam had significantly fewer adverse events than those treated with paroxetine (28.9% vs 70.6%, P < 0.001). The efficacy of clonazepam and paroxetine for the treatment of panic disorder was maintained over the long-term course. There was a significant advantage with clonazepam over paroxetine with respect to the frequency and nature of adverse events.

An elegy for Greg Ham: Copyright law, the Kookaburra case, and remix culture

The ‘Kookaburra’ case was a tragic and controversial copyright dispute, highlighting the need for copyright law reform by the Australian Parliament. In the Kookaburra case, a copyright action was brought by Larrikin Records against Men at Work’s song ‘Down Under’, alleging copyright infringement of the ‘Kookaburra’ song composed by Marion Sinclair. The dispute raised a host of doctrinal matters. There was disquiet over the length of the copyright term. There were fierce contests as to the copyright ownership of the ‘Kookaburra’ song. The litigation raised questions about copyright infringement and substantiality – particularly in relation to musical works. The ‘Kookaburra’ case highlighted frailties in Australia’s regime of copyright exceptions. The litigation should spur the Australian Law Reform Commission to make recommendations for law reform in its inquiry Copyright and the Digital Economy. This article provides a critical evaluation of the options of a defence for transformative use; a defence for fair use; and statutory licensing. The ‘Kookaburra’ case also examines the question of appropriate remedies in respect of copyright infringement. The conclusion considers the implications of the Kookaburra case for other forms of musical works – including digital sampling, mash-ups, and creative remixes. It finishes with an elegy for Greg Ham – paying tribute to the multi-instrumentalist for Men at Work.

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Abatacept in Children With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Objective. We previously documented that abatacept was effective and safe in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) who had not previously achieved a satisfactory clinical response with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tumor necrosis factor blockade. Here, we report results from the long-term extension (LTE) phase of that study.Methods. This report describes the long-term, open-label extension phase of a double-blind, randomized, controlled withdrawal trial in 190 patients with JIA ages 6-17 years. Children were treated with 10 mg/kg abatacept administered intravenously every 4 weeks, with or without methotrexate. Efficacy results were based on data derived from the 153 patients who entered the open-label LTE phase and reflect >= 21 months (589 days) of treatment. Safety results include all available open-label data as of May 7, 2008.Results. of the 190 enrolled patients, 153 entered the LTE. By day 589, 90%, 88%, 75%, 57%, and 39% of patients treated with abatacept during the double-blind and LTE phases achieved responses according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric 30 (Pedi 30), Pedi 50, Pedi 70, Pedi 90, and Pedi 100 criteria for improvement, respectively. Similar response rates were observed by day 589 among patients previously treated with placebo. Among patients who had not achieved an ACR Pedi 30 response at the end of the open-label lead-in phase and who proceeded directly into the LTE, 73%, 64%, 46%, 18%, and 5% achieved ACR Pedi 30, Pedi 50, Pedi 70, Pedi 90, and Pedi 100 responses, respectively, by day 589 of the LTE. No cases of tuberculosis and no malignancies were reported during the LTE. Pneumonia developed in 3 patients, and multiple sclerosis developed in 1 patient.Conclusion. Abatacept provided clinically significant and durable efficacy in patients with JIA, including those who did not initially achieve an ACR Pedi 30 response during the initial 4-month open-label lead-in phase.

Cumulative long-term safety, efficacy and patient-reported outcomes in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis treated with intravenous abatacept: up to 7 years of treatment

The long-term efficacy and safety of intravenous abatacept in patients (pts) with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) have been reported previously from the Phase III AWAKEN trial ([1, 2]). Here, we report efficacy, safety and pt-reported outcomes from the open-label, long-term extension (LTE) of AWAKEN, with up to 7 years of follow-up. Pts entered the LTE if they were JIA ACR 30 non-responders (NR) at the end of the 4-month lead-in period (abatacept only), or if they received abatacept or placebo (pbo) in the 6-month double-blind (DB) period. The Child Health Questionnaire was used to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL); physical (PhS) and psychosocial (PsS) summary and pain scores were analyzed. Pain was assessed by parent global assessment using a 100 mm visual analog scale. Efficacy and HRQoL evaluations are reported up to Day 1765 (~ Year 5.5). Safety is presented for the cumulative period (lead-in, DB and LTE), for all pts who received abatacept during the LTE. Of the 153 pts entering the LTE (58 from DB abatacept group, 59 from DB pbo group, 36 NR), 69 completed the trial (29 abatacept, 27 pbo, 13 NR). For pts treated in the LTE, mean (range) exposure to abatacept was 53.6 (5.6–85.6) months. During the LTE, incidence rates of AEs and serious AEs per 100 pt-years were 209.1 and 5.6. Thirty pts (19.6%) had serious AEs; most were unrelated and were musculoskeletal (8.5%) or infectious events (6.5%). No malignancy was reported. There was one death (accidental; unrelated). At Day 169, JIA ACR 50 and 70 response rates were 79.3% and 55.2% in the abatacept group, and 52.5% and 30.5% in the pbo group; 31.0% and 10.2% of pts in the abatacept and pbo groups, respectively, had inactive disease. By Day 1765, JIA ACR 50 and 70 response rates were 93.9% and 78.8% in the abatacept group, and 80.0% and 63.3% in the pbo group; 51.5% and 33.3% had inactive disease. In the NR group, 69.2% and 53.8% of pts achieved JIA ACR 50 and 70 responses at Day 1765, and 30.8% had inactive disease. In pts who entered the LTE, mean baseline PhS scores were below the range for healthy children (abatacept 30.2, pbo 31.0, NR 29.5). At Day 169, 38.3% of pts had reached a PhS score >50 ((1). By the end of the LTE, 43.5% of pts had reached a PhS score >50. At baseline, mean PsS scores for those who entered the LTE were slightly lower than the mean for healthy children (abatacept 43.5, pbo 44.2, NR 47.0). At Day 169, 54.9% of pts had a PsS score >50 (1). By Day 1765, 58.1% of pts had reached a PsS score >50. At baseline, the mean pain score was 42.9. By Day 169, 13.9% of pts were considered pain free (pain score = 0); this was maintained over the LTE (1).

Commentary on Maugham's Treatise on the Laws of Literary Property (1828)

The first British legal treatise dedicated specifically to the law of copyright written by a strong advocate of the common law rights of the author. Maugham, in addition to providing a commentary upon the law of copyright, also used his work to lobby for both an extension to the copyright term (ideally resulting in a perpetual right) and a reduction in the library deposit requirements (arguing that authors should only be required to deposit one copy of their work for the British Museum). In proselytising the need for a change to the law in both areas he drew frequent comparisons with the law of other jurisdictions (in particular France and Germany). The work became a standard point of reference for many British and American authors who followed.