[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Live blogging from the Eldred hearing
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Live blogging from the Eldred hearing
- From: Ann Okerson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 21:38:11 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-To: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
This major case is of interest to all on this list. FYI, the Moderators ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 16:30:01 -0400 From: Dave Farber <email@example.com> To: ip <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: [IP] Live blogging from the Eldred hearing ------ Forwarded Message From: Cory Doctorow <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 10:41:27 -0700 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Live blogging from the Eldred hearing http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/ modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=392 Features: Live From Eldred v. Ashcroft - I Posted by Raul Ruiz on Wednesday, October 09 @ 11:18:34 EDT Copyright Your humble reporters (Ernest Miller and Raul Ruiz) have just exited from the Supreme Court after hearing oral arguments in the case of Eldred v. Ashcroft. We are providing you this first report from memory as members of the public are not permitted to take notes in the Supreme Court. As representative for petioner, Larry Lessig spoke first. His first questions from Justice O'Connor regarded whether or not all copyright laws passed by Congress included retrospective extension. Prof. Lessig distinguished the first copyright law of 1790 from subsequent laws and characterized the first law as not truly a retrospective extension. There was a great deal of concern whether or not accepting Eldred's position would lead to the court having to invalidate many previous laws, in particular the copyright act of 1976. Justice Beyey gave Prof. Lessig an out by asking whether or not the court could refuse to invalidate the copyright act of 1976 due to the chaos it would create. More to come.. batteries Chief Justice Rehnquist also seemed skeptical of changing a pattern in lawmaking with such a long pedigree. Justice Breyer raised an analogy he would repeat with the Solicitor General. He asked whether under Eldred's argument it would be permissible to recopyright the bible, Ben Johnson, or Shakespeare. Justice Ginsberg was very tough on Eldred's First Amendment arguments. She couldn not see why the First Amendment arguments were different for prospective and retrospective copyright. She seemed to think this was a bad thing. Justices Scalia and Thomas asked no questions of Lessig. Scalia possibly because Lessig had been his clerk. Thomas because he seldom asks questions anyway. The most disturbing thing about the Solicitor General's argument was that no questions were asked regarding the First Amendment issues. Conclusion: Eldred loses the First Amendment issues completely. Justice Breyer was particularly hard on the government's position. He brought in a number of economic arguments. Basically, he made the point that the expected value of the extended copyright was so small as to be virtually zero. He also asked whether the governmen could recopyright Ben Johnson. The government did not say "no." Justice Stevens appeared skeptical of the government's arguments. The government made much of the inequities of not providing retroactive and prospective extension together. Scalia questioned whether the inequities argument could be turned around. J. Breyer, in essence, answered "yes" by claiming that existing copyright owners get all the benefit and, inequitably, prospective copyright owners get very little benefit. Although four justices were not satisfied with the government's arguments on retrospective copyright extensions, it is far from clear or even likely that Eldred will get the 5 votes necessary to overturn the statute. However, hope springs eternal. It would appear that Jack Valenti, who also attended the oral argument, has a number of reasons to justify the smile he wore as he entered the courtroom. -- Cory Doctorow email@example.com http://www.craphound.com Blog: http://boingboing.net ------ End of Forwarded Message
- Prev by Date: NYTimes.com Article: Copyright Challenge Heads to Court
- Next by Date: Job posting-Elec. Resources Libr.-Temple Univ.
- Prev by thread: Job posting-Elec. Resources Libr.-Temple Univ.
- Next by thread: NYTimes.com Article: Copyright Challenge Heads to Court