Kahle vs Ashcroft: Copyright Battle Continues

Robotech_Master writes "People may remember librarian Brewster Kahle as the man behind Archive.org's Wayback Machine and the Internet Bookmobile. He was one of the big supporters of Eldred in the Eldred vs Ashcroft case. Well, he's at it again. A new lawsuit, Kahle vs Ashcroft, has been filed as of March 22nd. Lawrence Lessig comments on this case in his blog." Question number 3 of the FAQ explains that while the Eldred case challenged the length of copyright expansion, this case challenges the breadth.

Comments

Creative Commons

[v_1_r_u_5]

Musicians who are interested in this might also be interested in the creative commons license.

Re:Hasn't this already been settled?

[panthro]

Not really. This is with reference to works that are no longer available... basically, he's saying that retaining copyright restrictions on abandonware is unconstitutional, and I agree.

Re:Hasn't this already been settled?

[AnyNoMouse]

Who's to classify a work as "abandonware?" If the author doesn't want the work released, he should have the right to keep it that way. The burden should rest on the publisher, even if that means tracking down the current copyright holder and begging for permission. Just because you can't find it easily doesn't mean that it should be free for the taking.

The constitution originally provided that all works had to apply for copyright to be copyrighted and that these copyrights had to apply for a renewal at some point to maintain copyright. A recent law changed these requirements.

"Abandonware" would be a copyrighted work that was not renewed.

Re:Another Possible Problem

[cpt kangarooski]

Yeah, that's a common misreading. Treaties enjoy equal status with federal law, not the Constitution.

For example, you could have a treaty that directly imposed a tax on Americans, but since the Constitution requires that the House propose taxes, and treaties only involve the President and the Senate, that treaty is not going to have any force.