Re: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from Eldred oral argument

["James S. Tyre" <jstyre(at)jstyre.com>]

>On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 10:35, Bryan Taylor wrote:
>
> > I'm really curious to hear what Scalia thought. As a textualist, I 
> would hope
> > he would be able to see that allowing one retro-active extension would also
> > allow repeated retro-active extensions which would allow unlimited duration
> > which is facially invalid.


According to several I've heard from who were there, Scalia asked only one 
question, highly unusual for him.  (There's been speculation that he held 
back because Larry used to clerk for him, but while some Justices are 
reticent to question their former clerks, Scalia usually isn't.)  According 
to Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2002/10/09/rtr745913.html

...

  Justice Antonin Scalia questioned why Congress needed to include existing 
works when it decided to beef up copyright laws. If the idea of copyright 
law is to encourage artists to produce new work, why should it also apply 
to works created 70 years ago, he asked.

"Why is it inequitable if they get what they're entitled to at the time 
they make the work?" Scalia asked.

...



--------------------------------------------------------------------
James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
Co-founder, The Censorware Project             http://censorware.net