Golan v. Holder

565 U.S. 302 (2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The United States joined the Berne Convention in 1989. Members of the Berne Union agree to treat authors from other member countries as well as they treat their own. Nationals of a member country, as well as any author who publishes in one of Berne's 164 member states, enjoy copyright protection in nations across the globe. Each country must afford at least the minimum level of protection specified by Berne. The copyright term must span the author's lifetime, plus at least 50 additional years, whether or not the author has complied with a member state's legal formalities. A work must be protected abroad unless its copyright term has expired in either the country where protection is claimed or the country of origin. Until 1891, foreign works were categorically excluded from Copyright Act protection. Throughout most of the 20th century, the only eligible foreign authors were those whose countries granted reciprocal rights to U.S. authors and whose, works were printed in the United States. To perfect U.S. implementation of Berne, and as part of our response to the Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations, Congress gave works enjoying copyright protection abroad the same full term of protection available to U.S. works. Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) grants copyright protection to pre-existing works of Berne member countries, protected in their country of origin, but lacking protection in the United States for any of three reasons: The United States did not protect works from the country of origin at the time of publication; the United States did not protect sound recordings fixed before 1972, or the author had failed to comply with U.S. statutory formalities (formalities Congress no longer requires as prerequisites to copyright protection). The URAA accords no protection to a foreign work after its full copyright term has expired, causing it to fall into the public domain, whether under the laws of the country of origin or of this country. Foreign authors gain no credit for the protection they lacked in years prior to §514's enactment. Section 514 foreign works “restored” to protection by the measure had entered the public domain in this country. Ps include orchestra conductors, musicians, publishers, and others who formerly enjoyed free access to works that §514 removed from the public domain. Ps sued claiming that the Constitution's Copyright and Patent Clause, Art. I, §8, cl. 8, and First Amendment both decree the invalidity of §514. Ps assert, a work that has entered the public domain, for whatever reason, must forever remain there. The District Court granted the Attorney General's motion for summary judgment. The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed in part. The court held that the statute “ 'altered the traditional contours of copyright protection,' ” the court said--specifically, the “bedrock principle” that once works enter the public domain, they do not leave. On remand the District Court held Section 514 does not regulate speech on the basis of its content; therefore the law would be upheld if “narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest. It granted summary judgment to Ps. D appealed. The Tenth Circuit reversed. The court determined that the law was narrowly tailored to fit the important government aim of protecting U.S. copyright holders' interests abroad. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.