ASHINGTON, Oct. 5 — A lawyer challenging a recent law that extends copyrights told a federal appeals court here today that the extension restricted an artist's First Amendment right to draw on works from other artists, thus stifling creativity and competition.
The law, enacted two years ago with heavy support from companies like Time Warner and Walt Disney, extended the life of copyright protection for creators of original works by 20 years. It effectively prevents several of Disney's most lucrative cartoon characters, for example, from becoming public property in the next several years. Mickey Mouse had been set to pass into the public domain in 2004; Pluto, Goofy and Donald Duck would have followed in 2009.
Under the law, those characters (or songs and other images) will remain copyrighted just as the potential for their use increases sharply with the popularity of new media like digital television, cable services and the Internet.
Last year, a group of Harvard professors asked the United States District Court in Washington to declare the copyright extension bill unconstitutional. The case, Eldred v. Reno, was dismissed in October 1999.
But Lawrence Lessig, a professor of law at Stanford University who was involved in the original case and who is representing the plaintiffs in the appeal, argued this morning before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the case "merits heightened review."
Artists, Mr. Lessig said, look to works in the public domain for inspiration and ideas. The extension of copyrights, he said, violates guarantees of free speech by reprivatizing works that otherwise would have become public property.
Mr. Lessig has said that copyright laws, as outlined in the Constitution, should "promote the progress of science and useful arts."
Alfred R. Mollin, arguing on behalf of the Justice Department, however, said that "one must look at the system as a whole," which, he said, "protects works from dilution."
The extension, Mr. Mollin said, protects and promotes creativity by making the payoff more valuable.
"When you look at the system as a whole," Mr. Mollin said of the current copyright process, "it is good for the arts."
Copyrights are granted to encourage creativity by publicizing new works while ensuring the artists a reasonable return. Public interest is preserved by guaranteeing that eventually the right to use the works will enter the public domain.
But in many cases, Mr. Lessig contends, large corporations have benefited the most from the copyright laws because they often hold valuable copyrights. Congress, by extending the duration of copyrights, are "rewarding and protecting monopolies," Mr. Lessig said.
The 1998 law lengthened copyrights for works created on or after Jan. 1, 1978, to the life of the author plus 70 years; it extended copyrights for works created for hire and owned by corporations to 95 years, from 75.
