[bvw]

And music is not a useful art nor is it a science. So no copyright can be granted it. At least, as Scalia, would say as those terms were known to be defined originally, in 1787. Of course in Scalia's view that somehow doesn't matter. Nor does the term "limited" used in the pharse "by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" carry any meaning, whatsoever. It may be 14, 28, 75, 100, hike!

And so it has been. Nor does the "limited Time" known and established at the date of entry of an assertion -- a claim of patent or copyright matter -- those contractual durations may be lengthened forever and ever, so it seems. One might ask if Congress might ever shorten them? Or would that be considered "bad"? Yet lengthening the original term of contracted grant is fine and dandy. According to Scalia.

Nor, in Scalia's view, is "for limited Times" restricted by the terms "Authors and Inventors", meaning individual persons living, even when that sense is bulwarked by "their respective" and "limited times". No "heirs and assigns" in the Constitution for these grants. Grants that are a reduction in the rights of everyone else, by the way.

[itsahoot]

Nor does the "limited Time" known and established at the date of entry of an assertion --

If you remember the rationalization for this was to keep Mickey Mouse from being exploited in evil ways.

I can tell you for a fact during WW II there were plenty of Mickey & Minnie porno mini comics around.