[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

so sad, the Supreme court finds it difficult to side with Lessig/Eldred(fwd)

Subject: so sad,
     the Supreme court finds it difficult to side with Lessig/Eldred

The news so far suggests that the fault lies, not with
the constitutionality of the length of copyright, but, with
the pliability of the Congress itself!  (Senator McCain, I
do hope your "software money" triumph cures these problems.)

WCP

COURT FINDS COPYRIGHT CASE A TOUGH ONE

After intense oral arguments on Wednesday, the Supreme Court appeared torn
as to the ultimate outcome of the Eldred v. Ashcroft copyright extension
case. The high court's ruling will determine whether Congress faces any
real limits in giving authors and artists exclusive control of their work
-- a matter made murkier by the Internet's ability to facilitate the
spread of works in the public domain. "I can find a lot of fault with what
Congress did here... [b]ut does it violate the Constitution?" asked
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, adding that it might not have been good
policy to keep so much art from public use. Stanford Law professor
Lawrence Lessig answered Justice O'Connor's question in the affirmative,
arguing that the 20-year extension exceeds Congress's power to set
"limited times" and also violates the First Amendment. While Lessig
focused on potential users of artistic works, Solicitor General Theodore
Olson defended the creators, suggesting that Congress intended to give
artists a wide window to benefit from a work's distribution.

[SOURCE: USA Today, AUTHOR: Joan Biskupic]
(http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2002-10-09-net-copyright_x.htm


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de