Read it here.
Stanford Center for Internet and Society
In the heart of the Silicon Valley, legal doctrine is emerging that will determine the course of civil rights and technological innovation for decades to come. The Center for Internet and Society (CIS), housed at Stanford Law School and a part of the Law, Science and Technology Program, is at the apex of this evolving area of law.
Kahle v. Gonzales
In this case, two archives ask the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to hold that statutes that extended copyright terms unconditionally — the Copyright Renewal Act and the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA)— are unconstitutional under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, and that the Copyright Renewal Act and CTEA together create an “effectively perpetual” term with respect to works first published after January 1, 1964 and before January 1, 1978, in violation of the Constitution’s Limited Times and Promote...Progress Clauses. The Complaint asks the Court for a declaratory judgment that copyright restrictions on orphaned works — works whose copyright has not expired but which are no longer available — violate the constitution.
Share your experiences trying to use orphaned works here.
Plaintiffs file brief in opposition to government's motion to dismiss
by Christopher Sprigman, posted on September 8, 2004 - 8:14pm
The Internet Archive and the Prelinger Archive have filed their opposition to the government's motion to dismiss in Kahle v. Ashcroft, a case challenging the constitutionality of Congress's removal from the copyright laws of our traditional system of formalities (i.e., registration, notice, renewal). CIS's Larry Lessig, Jennifer Granick and Chris Sprigman represent plaintiffs. Here's the opening paragraphs of our brief:
This case is about the speech-related harms caused when Congress radically changed the nature of American copyright law. For the first 186 years of our Republic, copyright laws established an "opt-in" system, one in which copyrights were secured only to those who took steps to claim them. In 1976 and 1989, Congress inverted this regime, transforming copyright law into an "opt-out" system, one in which rights are granted automatically and indiscriminately unless disclaimed.
Government moves to Dismiss Kahle's Complaint
by Elizabeth Rader, posted on June 24, 2004 - 3:54pm
On June 23, 2004, the Government responded to the suit by filing a Motion to Dismiss. Download file The Government relies heavily on the Supreme Court's decision in Eldred and the recently-decided Luck's Music Library case in the D.C. District.
Complaint
by Lauren Gelman, posted on March 22, 2004 - 1:05pm
Amended Complaint filed March 30, 2004 in Kahle v. Ashcroft.
Kahle v. Ashcroft FAQ
by Lauren Gelman, posted on March 22, 2004 - 10:29am
1. What’s this case about?
It is about freeing our culture from unnecessary and harmful regulation. It is about a series of recent changes to copyright law that have failed to benefit copyright owners, but have instead created serious burdens on those who create culture in the digital environment.
Plaintiffs in this case -- the Internet Archive and its Chairman, Brewster Kahle, and the Prelinger Film Archive (formally, Prelinger Associates, Inc.) and its President, Richard Prelinger -- are filing suit seeking a declaratory judgment that the current system of unconditional copyright is unconstitutional.
Our Issues
cybercrime
Fair Use Project
free speech
infrastructure
intellectual property
privacy
anti-circumvention copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons defamation DMCA drm economics Fair Use first amendment Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform journalism libel podcasting Privacy surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks
anti-circumvention copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons defamation DMCA drm economics Fair Use first amendment Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform journalism libel podcasting Privacy surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks