In <[email protected]>, on 11/23/2012
at 12:34 PM, Randy Hudson <[email protected]> said:
>There was a 2002 Supreme Court case on that, Eldred v Ashcroft;
<the Court held that as long as Congress specified a specific term
>for copyrights, the laws were Constitutional, even if they
>regularly extended that term.
I'm quite certain that the founding fathers would have called that
judicial activism, or something less polite.
>Just a week ago, there was an interesting development, as the US
>House Republicans first published and then recalled a document
>urging an overhaul of US copyright law.
Why did they recall it?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
