Kristine C. Braddock
Copyright aims to incentivize the creation of original art, but it does so at the cost of public access. As technology has evolved over the past two hundred years, Congress has persistently extended the copyright term, theoretically providing more incentive and less public access. But this trend toward perpetual protection strains the “limited Times” constraint of the Copyright Clause, whose entire purpose is to maximize creative output. This Article examines the implications of an extended copyright term, focusing on its impact on artistic innovation, particularly in light of Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith and the Court’s increasingly narrow interpretation of the fair use doctrine. Ultimately, this Article argues that Congress should reduce the copyright term to compensate for doctrinal shifts in fair use. In so doing, Congress would restore the balance between authors’ rights and the public’s rights in a way that maximizes creative output—the ultimate goal of copyright.