Editing Jonathan Zittrain (section)

=== Copyright ===
On October 9, 2002, Zittrain and [[Lawrence Lessig]] argued a landmark case, known as ''[[Eldred v. Ashcroft]]'', before the [[United States Supreme Court]]. As co-counsel for the plaintiff, they argued that the [[Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act]] (CTEA) was unconstitutional.<ref>{{cite news |author=Maytal, Anat |title=Professor To Present Case to Supreme Court |url=http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=161807 |date=February 21, 2002 |newspaper=The Harvard Crimson |access-date=2008-04-18}}</ref> The court ruled 7–2 on January 15, 2003, to uphold the CTEA which extended existing [[copyright]]s 20 years, from the life of the author plus 50 years, to plus 70 years. In the words of Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], the petitioners did "not challenge the CTEA's 'life-plus-70-years' time span itself. They maintain that [[United States Congress|Congress]] went awry not with respect to newly created works, but in enlarging the term for published works with existing copyrights." The court found that the act did "not exceed Congress' power" and that "CTEA's extension of existing and future copyrights does not violate the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]]".<ref>{{cite web |title=ELDRED V. ASHCROFT (01-618) 537 U.S. 186 (2003) |url=http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-618.ZS.html |publisher=Supreme Court collection of Cornell Law School |access-date=2008-04-18}}</ref> In 2003 Zittrain said he was concerned that Congress will hear the same arguments after the 20-year extension passes, and that the Internet is causing a "cultural reassessment of the meaning of copyright".<ref>{{cite news |title=The Year of the Copyright |url=http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/bulletin/2003/spring/bf_01.html |work=Harvard Law Bulletin |publisher=The President and Fellows of Harvard College |date=Spring 2003 |access-date=2008-04-18}}</ref>