Congress'S Power To Promote The Progress Of Science: Eldred V. Ashcroft

Name

Congress'S Power To Promote The Progress Of Science: Eldred V. Ashcroft

Cite

36 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 1

Year

2002

Bluebook cite

Lawrence B. Solum, Congress'S Power To Promote The Progress Of Science: Eldred V. Ashcroft, 36 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 1 (Fall 2002)

Author

Lawrence B. Solum

URL

36 LYLALR 1

Item Type

article

Summary

In this Essay, I begin in Part I by framing the issues in Eldred v. Ashcroft by discussing the history of copyright legislation in general and the CTEA in particular and then summarizing the procedural history of Eldred v. Ashcroft. I turn next in Part II to a detailed investigation of the text of the Intellectual Property Clause, with a special emphasis on the interpretation of the Clause by the first Congress and early judicial decisions. Three elements of the constitutional text have important implications for Eldred. First, the Copyright Clause requires that Congress pursue the goal of promoting the progress of science. Second, the meaning of science that best coheres with the constitutional text and the original understanding can be glossed as systematic knowledge or learning of enduring value. Third, if the limited times restriction is to impose a meaningful limit on Congress's power, the most plausible constructions are inconsistent with either a term of life plus seventy years or with retroactive extensions, *4 or both. In Part III, I provide a reader's guide to the debate over the issues in Eldred v. Ashcroft, organizing some of the arguments made by the contributors to this symposium around the questions on which the Supreme Court will hear argument. Part IV concludes with an overview of the difficult choice the Supreme Court must make.

Excerpts and Summaries

Created

Wednesday 12 of August, 2009 17:25:58 GMT
by Unknown

LastModif

Wednesday 12 of August, 2009 17:25:58 GMT
by Unknown