[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Transcript Online
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Transcript Online
- From: Jeremy Erwin <jerwin(at)ponymail.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 03:03:35 -0400
- In-reply-to: <20021018032330.86669.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
I seem to recall, somewhat dimly,that the CTEA actually did remove some
works form the public domain. Is this correct?
"
JUSTICE SOUTER: Why wouldn't it? If the equity argument under the
Necessary and Proper Clause justifies extension of the copyright for
those whose copyright will expire tomorrow if it's not extended, in
order to put them on parity with those getting copyrights for new
works, why doesn't it apply to the copyright, the holder of the
copyright that expired yesterday?
GENERAL OLSON: You could arguably [*42] -- you could conceivably make
that argument, Justice Souter, but there is a bright line there.
Something that has already gone into the public domain, which other
individuals or companies or entities may then have acquired an interest
in, or rights to, or be involved in disseminating --
"
Jeremy