Matt has written a great article today about Eldred v. Ashcroft and what a creative commons could mean. Like Matt, I'm concerned that the case is not going to be won, but I've got my fingers crossed for the L Train.
I'd love to live in a country where copyright protection is available, does not last forever, is not renewable, and the price you pay for that protection is you have to give it up after a reasonable amount of time (10-20 years seems more than fair). That way individuals have incentive to create and publish original works and thoughts, but we all benefit from those creations after a time. There's no right answer to the copyright question -- it's a matter of preference -- but as both a creator and consumer of copyrighted works, I'd prefer to be part of a society that values both protection and a plentiful amount of intellectual and artistic energy in the public domain.
Update: The hearing is over. Some coverage: High court hears arguments in case of Congress, copyright and Mickey Mouse, Live from Eldred v. Ashcroft I, a summary of the arguments, NY Times: Supreme Court Hears Copyright Challenge.
