Haven't had an opportunity to reflect on it, but those who want to form their own impressions can read the full opinion at:
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-980829.htmlWhat concerns me is the over-all tone: that the Courts have to defer to Congress on issues of policy affecting copyright and intellectual property. That suggests that the 'Fair Use' doctrine - which some people thought was derived from the Constitution - may in fact be open to legislative curtailment. And we all know what that means, since money votes.
Judge Ginsburg's discussion of 'Fair Use' intimates a much more limited scope than the
Sony case: some discussion of fair use for parody and educational purposes, but there is no reference in that portion of her opinion to consumer's rights to replicate artistic content for no-commercial purposes. Furthermore, she suggests that Congress has the right to
define the scope of copyright under the Constitution, which taken literally means the courts can't second guess our elected reps if they decide that copying for personal use isn't 'fair use'.
Somewhere I suppose the curtailment of rights to reproduce protected material could violate the First Amendment, but I'm not sure the cut-off point is where we liked to think it was.
Now that the hardware and content providers have agreed on a legislative strategy (no curtailment of hardware functionality, no expansion or codification of consumer rights), I have a nasty feeling the walls are closing in on us.
Hope I'm wrong. Interested in other opinions on this one. I'm posting in the main forum because I think this impacts all users, and there isn't much traffic over there on the Emusic Board.
HTH