Regarding Henry Miller’s comment – I agree that Congress is slowly becoming aware there are two sides to this issue. Last year, I sent my Congressman (a prominent CBC member for whatever that’s worth) a modified EFF email urging rejection of the Broadcast Flag. I wasn’t expecting anything in return but I got a well-written email describing his concerns with the Broadcast Flag’s possible impact on educational programming. It was a pleasant surprise, considering the guy doesn’t really need my vote (he won with ~80% in the last election). And look, here we are two years after the courts struck the Broadcast Flag down and Congress still hasn’t put it back in place.

Finally, I’ve got a question, or maybe a challenge, for Tim. Tim has defended the Grokster decision in the past. I’d like to know what he thinks of the interpretation of Grokster that Epstein/Picker acolyte Doug Lichtman put forth in his L.A. Times op/ed piece. I think Lichtman’s interpretation is monstrous and comes close to defining a new category of thoughtcrime. I’d really like to know what Tim thinks.

His alleged preference for Congressional supremacy was a snide attack on the Court for ruling against his very weak argument in Eldred, and he closed by calling the Court “clever”, the criticism that thinking people use against Lessig, as in “too clever by half.”

He’s no longer advocating a policy, he’s simply tilting at windmills.

Lessig (and EFF) should stop filing cases just to make a point when they know their arguments are bogus…

Tim, allow the courts to do their job in setting DMCA precedence. One of the first things that came to mind in reading your paper is that the courts have no power to outline application of the DMCA.

Have faith, grasshoppa…

Or perhaps he’s reading the law as it stands, rather than as an advocate before a court?

I’m not sure if Lessig was really advocating for a greater role for Congress in the piece — but rather is just pointing out what he sees as inconsistencies in the SC’s rulings. It’s sort of mocking the SC, because, basically, they told him that Congress had the final say on copyright law when his case came before them — but on Grokster, he feels that they went over the head of Congress.

So, focusing on Congress is just his way of pointing out that they were inconsistent, not advocating a bigger role for Congress…

At least that’s my interpretation.

I first started following copyright law just after the DMCA (Like most people this blindsided me), and writing letters to my congressman. At first all I got was a generic form letter thanking me for writing. Now when I write the letter is very specific, “Like you I’m concerned that copyright has gone too far”.

In short, congress has heard our letters. They know that letter writers are very likely to vote, and also get their friends to vote – based on the context of the letters. This is far more important than money. Right now those who want longer/stricter copyrights are just praying that congress doesn’t take the issue up, because they know congress is no longer in their favor – the people have spoken.

Now we need to hit the grassroots hard to keep pressure on congress to change the laws.