Re: [dvd-discuss] Argument: NO extensions can be constitutional. Eldredrelated -- of DVD interest

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

But while the government may argue that they have a compelling interest 
for longer copyright terms, they have a REQUIREMENT to promote progress. 
Somewhere between a 28 and a 50 yrs term, promotion of progress ceases 
because the  creators are DEAD.





"Jeremy A Erwin" <jerwin@gmu.edu>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
01/25/02 10:57 AM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] Argument: NO extensions can be constitutional. Eldred 
related -- of DVD interest



On Friday, January 25, 2002, at 11:59  AM, John Zulauf wrote:

> (3) Thus we can assert an historical (and non-hypothetical) proof that
> 14+14 copyright terms are sufficient to incent the broad publication of
> works (at least books, charts, et. al.)
>
> (4) Given that the initial 14+14 year term was sufficient any longer
> term is supersufficient
>

Yeah, but the government will assert that the longer copyright terms are 
necessary  to offset the falling costs of piracy. Longer copyright 
term -> more to time to offset initial costs. (see Landes/Posner, 1989).

It's simplistic, the math is laughable, but the government will argue 
that point 3 is false.

Jeremy