RE: The Era of Perpetual Copyright

This seems a deeply cynical response.

 Have you no faith in the democratic process?

>From the point of view of an outsider - not being a US citizen, and not
having read the decision - it seems to me that Supreme Court did not decide on the political or economic merits or otherwise of term extension, but only on the constitutionality of it. It is for Congress to decide on the former, representing the will of the people; it is for the Supreme Court to decide whether Congress' decision lies within the authority granted by the Constitution. Perhaps I am wrong, but I do not think that it is right, in a democracy, for the judiciary to make decisions that are essentially political and economic; those decisions lie with the people via their elected representatives. If the people get it wrong, as they may have done this time, the judiciary should not rescue them from their folly; that is a matter for the next set of elected politicians. The judiciary's powers should be limited only to determining the constitutionality of Congess' actions.

Term extension is essentially a political and economic issue.

I have no doubt that in 2019 or thereabouts, Disney and others will push for a further term extension. But, in a democracy, it is up to those who would oppose such a thing, to ensure that it would be political suicide for a congressperson to support such a claim.

In the last year or two, I believe that copyright has - through cases like Napster, and Dmitri Sklyarov - finally impinged upon popular consciousness. The Sonny Bono act got through because, at the time, the issue was off the political radar screen and the corporations' bucks spoke louder than the popular vote. It is up to you, the American people, to ensure that this does not happen again.

Edward Barrow
New Media Copyright Consultant
http://www.copyweb.co.uk/
***Important: see http://www.copyweb.co.uk/email.htm for information about the legal status of this email ***

On Thursday, January 16, 2003 8:07 AM, Stephen Fishman [SMTP:sfish55[_at_]yahoo.com] wrote:
> As a result of the Eldred decision, it seems clear
> we've now entered upon an age of perpetual copyright
> protection. I have no doubt that in 2019 Disney and
> other major copyright owners will get Congress to
> extend pre-1978 copyrights yet again, and will cite
> the Eldred case as justification. No work published
> during 1963-1977 will enter the public domain during
> our lifetimes, or those of our children or their
> children.
>
> Moreover, once valuable post-1978 works start to
> approach the end of their copyright terms, the life
> plus 70 year (formerly 50) term will doubtless be
> extended as well. This is already being discussed in
> Europe.
>
> So, the public domain is now largely a closed book.
> The only new material that will enter the public
> domain is some unpublished works, U.S. government
> publications and laws, and works dedicated to the
> public domain.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Received on Fri Jan 17 2003 - 09:31:41 GMT