[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
- From: Tom <tom(at)lemuria.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:43:11 +0200
- In-reply-to: <3cf5112e.102b.0@panix.com>; from murphy@panix.com on Wed, May 29, 2002 at 01:34:38PM -0500
- References: <3cf5112e.102b.0@panix.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 01:34:38PM -0500, Roy Murphy wrote:
> > > The answer for an upper limit could be in the constitution.
> > > ...by securing for limited Times to Authors...
> > > Anything granted beyond an author's lifetime
> > > is being granted to someone else.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[...]
> their actions were constitutional. Since the First Congress passed the
> 1790 Copyright act with a 14 year term (and a 14 year extension upon
> renewal if the author is still alive and renews), terms exceeding the
> lifespan of the author are presumptively constitutional.
yes, because the term can, let's say, "by accident" exceed the lifetime
of the author. however, an argument could be made that "life + x years"
is a different animal because it is ON PURPOSE going beyond the
author's lifespan.
--
New GPG Key issued (old key expired):
http://web.lemuria.org/pubkey.html
pub 1024D/2D7A04F5 2002-05-16 Tom Vogt <tom@lemuria.org>
Key fingerprint = C731 64D1 4BCF 4C20 48A4 29B2 BF01 9FA1 2D7A 04F5