Supreme Court Upholds
Copyright Term Extension Act
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7–2 January 15 that Congress did not exceed its authority when it passed legislation extending copyright protection by 20 years. In writing the majority opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the law does not violate free-speech rights, and it “protects authors’ original expression from unrestricted exploitation.” However, Ginsburg emphasized that the court was not passing judgment on whether the law was a wise policy decision, Reuters reported January 15.
The Copyright Term Extension Act does allow libraries to reproduce and distribute copies of works during the last 20 years of any copyright term, as long as they are “not already being exploited commercially and further copies are unavailable at a reasonable price.” Ginsburg also wrote that the act still allows “considerable latitude for scholarship and comment . . . even for parody” under fair-use guidelines.
In his dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens accused the majority of “failing to protect the public interest in free access to the products of inventive and artistic genius.” Justice Stephen Breyer concurred, writing that the law benefits corporate financial interests and “threatens to interfere with efforts to preserve our nation’s historical and cultural heritage and efforts to use that heritage, say, to educate our nation’s children.”
Posted January 20, 2003.
|
