Paper details:
the Copyright Term Extension Act extended the copyright of items, preventing them from entering the public domain, and in some cases, reviving copyright on items that had entered the public domain.
In 2019 many of these items were set to enter the public domain and many predicted that intense lobbying would again persuade Congress to extend terms. But that didn’t happen, primarily as you read in the article by timothy lee / because of well organized grassroots anti-copyright extension groups, the internet as a communication medium, and the benefits of public domain works by some large companies (Google).
In the Supreme Court heard the argument over the “unconstitutionality” of the copyright term after it was extended in the CTEA. There were many arguments in that case as to what the Founding Fathers intended when inserting the “copyright clause” into the Constitution.
What do you think? Does the current length of copyright terms conflict with the Constitution and the Founding Father’s intent? Why/why not? Cite evidence; what did the Founding Fathers intend? What did they say? If you research, you will be able to find what some of the founding fathers said. You need ‘proof’ that it does conflict or it doesn’t conflict? What is needed here is a logical argument and arguments that require facts. You will definitely have to do some research here.
Do you think that copyright extension is a ‘good’ thing (ie., beneficial) for individuals, corporations, and society as a whole? Give support. Logical arguments require facts. Cite support.
Do not use anything Disney related as examples.