The Constitution says that Congress has power "to
promote the Progress
of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and
Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries."
The argument is first, that "limited Times" means there cannot
be
retrospective extensions; and second, that even if the Court decides
that some extensions are permitted, "limited" must still be
interpreted
in light of the first phrase, "to promote the Progress of Science
and
useful arts." In other words, if the extension doesn't promote
progress, it doesn't satisfy the rest of the Clause.
For more information, see my article Patent and Copyright Term
Extension and the Constitution: A Historical Perspective, 49 J. Copyr.
Soc'y USA 19 (2002), available online at:
http://www.law.asu.edu/HomePages/Karjala/OpposingCopyrightExtension/commentary.html
Tyler T. Ochoa
Professor and Co-Director
Center for Intellectual Property Law
Whittier Law School
---------------------
I did, and found it very interesting.
Amalyah Keshet
---
You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
