Eldred v. Ashcroft

Legal Documents: District Court

Documents relating to the District Court stage of the case.

• Complaint - Plaintiffs file complaint in D.C. District Court against Janet Reno in her official capacity, challenging the constitutionality of the Copyright Term Extension Act. Filed 1/11/99
• First Amended Complaint - Plaintiffs file amended complaint to reflect the addition of additional parties to the suit (including Copyright's Commons). Filed 5/10/99
• Second Amended Complaint - Plaintiffs file second amended complaint. Filed 6/24/99
• Government's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings - The government files a motion for judgment on the pleadings. With this motion, the government asks the court to decide the case without further arguments from either side. Filed 6/25/99
• Amicus Brief - A group of amici file a brief in support of the government's position. Filed 6/28/99
• Plaintiff's Response to the Gov'ts Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment- Plaintiffs file a response to the government's motion of for judgment on the pleadings and cross-motion for summary judgment. With this motion, the plaintiffs argue that the law requires a judgment in their favor. Filed 7/23/99
  • Affidavit of Hal R. Varian
    
  • Extraordinary thanks
• Government's Response to Plaintiff's Summary Judgment and Reply on its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings - The government files a response to the plaintiff's motion for summary judmgent and a reply on its motion for judgment on the pleadings. Filed 8/23/99
• Amicus Brief - Another amicus brief is filed in support of the government's position. Filed 8/23/99
• Plaintiffs' Reply - Plaintiffs reply in support of their motion for judgment on the pleadings or in the alternative for summary judgment. Filed 9/10/99
  • More thanks
• District Court Opinion: On October 28, 1999, Judge June Green granted summary judgment to the government in a brief opinion dismissing the plaintiffs' arguments.
  1. that the Copyright Term Extension Act does not violate the First Amendment because there is no First Amendment right to use the copyrighted works of others;
  2. that the retrospective extension of the Act is within Congress's power under the Copyright Clause of the Constitution because the "limited times" period is subject to the discretion of Congress and an author may agree in advance to transfer any future benefit Congress might confer; and
  3. that the Act does not violate the public trust doctrine because that doctrine applies only to navigable waters.