Sigh.

We argued that the “contours of copyright” had changed in 1976 by going from an Opt-in system to an Opt-out system and therefore the test the Supreme Court set out in its Eldred ruling (20 year extension is not enough of a change, it must change the “contour of copyright”) is met and therefore the 1976 copyright act warrants First Amendment review.

In other words: “you have to put a (c) on a document and send it into the Library of Congress” (copyright of Thomas Jefferson from the founding) to a “you get copyright on every scribble and spew whether you want it or not, and, oh, it usually lasts over 100 years” (copyright sponsored by Disney circa 1976) has been ruled not a “change in the contours of copyright” according to Jerome Farris of the 9th Circuit.

Wow.

So all spammers would be glad to hear that this court ruled that going from Opt-in to Opt-out is not a big difference.

As I am not a lawyer, I must be missing something, but this does not seem to be good judging.

Reuters piece:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070122/wr_nm/copyright_appeal_dc_2

Opinion:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1FABEA163F4C714A8825726B005A12F0/%24file/0417434.pdf

Background:

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/kahle-v-gonzales

-brewster