October Term 2002 · Docket 01-618
Can Congress extend copyright terms for existing works?
the sides that brought the case challenge the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act. They argue it exceeds congressional power. the opposing sides defend the statute's validity.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Lawrence Lessig argued the extension exceeds congressional power. He cited First Amendment violations.
Theodore Olson argued the first Congress protected existing copyrights. He cited historical precedent for the extension.
Chief Justice Rehnquist introduced the case. He noted the how the case got here of the dispute.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the limits of copyright law. It asks if Congress can extend terms for existing works. The outcome affects public access to creative material.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 9, 2002.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the court to strike down the 1998 Act. They seek to restore public domain access to older works.
the opposing sides want the court to uphold the 1998 Act. They seek to maintain extended copyright protection for existing works.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the extension exceeds congressional power. They claim it violates the First Amendment.
the opposing sides argue the first Congress protected existing copyrights. They claim this history supports the current extension.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
What the justices asked
Does the Copyright Clause allow extending terms for existing works?
Does the First Amendment limit copyright term extensions?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
Why it matters
This case defines the boundary of copyright protection. It determines how long works remain private. It shapes public access to cultural material.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 13-3 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 13-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-15
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.