Eldred v. Ashcroft Oral Arguments

PMuse and others wrote in about the oral arguments held today in the Eldred v. Ashcroft case challenging the most recent 20-year retroactive extension of copyright terms. Google News will cover the mainstream news stories about it; transcripts of the arguments will eventually be posted; but as I write this the only first-hand reports appear to be LawMeme and the Associated Press. Reader McSpew adds a link to a piece by Steven Levy explaining the importance of Eldred v. Ashcroft and what's really at stake. Update: 10/09 19:12 GMT by T : khkramer links to his own summary of the arguments, writing "I have press credentials at the court, so I was able to take notes during the argument, and in the summary I tried to cover all of the major issues that the Justices asked about."

Comments

Re:Not looking forward to the outcome

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

if there's no incentive to create things 100 years ago, no one's going to use a time machine to take advantage of retroactive copywright extensions! You slashdot jerks just need to start buying frigging out of print books! JUST ADMIT DANIELLE STEELE IS WAY BETTER THAN ANY BLOG ENTRY EVER WRITTEN AND THIS GUY WILL GO AWAY!

Re:Oral?

[unicron]

My god how is this dinosaur still making decisions for us? He's more than likely all for taking us back to the 50's. I guess we could always just send him the goatse.cx pic, rapidly decensitize him, show him something so utterly horrible that a semi-nude statue will no longer faze him.

Bush's Newspeak?

[garyrich]

Maybe that's what they are really with the doublespeak about "terra-ists", "homeland", "evil-doers", "enemy combatants", etc. By making new definition for older words they can make is t=so that when you read the constitution and look up the definition of the words in the Newspeak Dictionary - it will mean what they wan't it to mean.