1. HLS, July 2, 2002

2. because “copyright protection is not perpetual, the number of... works in the public domain necessarily increases each year.” HLS, July 2, 2002

4. Congress has the power … To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

9. Congress has the power … To [a] promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

10. Congress has the power … To [a] promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by [b] securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

11. Congress has the power … To [a] … by [b] …

12. Congress has the power … To [a] promote the Progress of Science by [b] securing for limited Times to Authors exclusive Right to their Writings;

17. commons

18. lawyer

20. “limited Times”

21. 1790 “fourteen years” maybe x2

22. to 42 (1831)

23. 56 (1909)

24. 59 (1962)

25. 61 (1965)

26. 63 (1967)

27. 64 (1968)

28. 65 (1969)

29. 66 (1970)

30. 67 (1971)

31. 68 (1972)

32. 70 (1974)

33. 75 (1976)

34. 95 (1998)

35. Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act

36. aka

37. Mickey Mouse Protection Act

38. No one can do to Disney what Disney did to the Brothers Grimm

43. “civil disobedience”

44. =

45. jail

47. January, 1999

48. Complaint

49. Complaint (2d amended) 1. Retroactive extensions of copyright violate the Progress Clause. 2. Retroactive and this prospective extension(s) violate the 1st Amendment 3. Retroactive extensions violate the public trust doctrine.

50. CC claim: Retroactive extensions are not “limited Times”

51. not “limited Times” 1. no limit

52. reliance

53. not “limited Times” 1. no limit 2. doesn’t “promote Progress”

54. Congress has the power … To [a] promote the Progress of Science by [b] securing for limited Times to Authors exclusive Right to their Writings;

55. Congress has the power … To [a] … by [b] …

56. Promote in reverse?

57. Can we get Gershwin to write more?

58. no.

59. not “limited Times” 1. no limit 2. doesn’t “promote Progress” 3. not a quid pro quo

60. this for that

61. monopoly for creative work

62. Bono Act: this for nada

66. Gov’t: limited so long as limited

67. historical context

68. historical enemy

69. publishers

70. “old patentees and monopolizers in the trade of bookselling, men who do not labour in an honest profession to learning is indetted.”

71. gov’t reading: worsen problem

72. Eldred’s: solves

73. (2) Retroactive and this prospective extension(s) violate the 1st Amendment

74. CC & ©? 1. 1st A: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech” 2. © is a regulation of speech 3. Ergo: © is unconstitutional?

75. Harper: “engine of free expression”

76. limit speech to produce more speech

77. no abridgment

78. but we argue:

79. retroactive extensions: restrictions producing nada

83. prospective extensions: not severable

84. Gov’t: Heightened 1st A review doesn’t apply.

85. DCt: 1999

86. no.

87. CADC: 2000

88. no.

89. CADC: (1) “promote the Progress” has no constraining effect on Congress at all.

90. CADC: (2) Copyrights categorically immune from 1st A scrutiny

92. Sentelle, dissent

93. Lopez

94. Rehearing: 2001

95. No!

96. Sentelle & Tatel, dissent

97. most conservative & most liberal, dissent

98. February 2002: cert granted

99. May 2002: opening briefs

101. amici …

102. Free Software Foundation

103. Eagle Forum

104. 17 economists

105. “no brainer”

106. law profs

107. librarians

108. historians

109. Brewster Kahle

110. Hal Roach Studios

112. Fall, 2002: SCt

113. Spring, 2003: resolved