DTC 356 Lessarry

When it came to making his Supreme Court argument, Lessig could have really used some help from Parry. Like the moot lawyer Don Ayer said "you have to make them see the harm..." (237). In his writing Lessig admits that ignoring this advice may be biggest reason he lost the case. The justice's simply weren't interested in his argument about the history of our copyright policy. If it was so bad why should we have to change it now? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Lessig wasn't able to convince them the system was broken. They needed specific reasons and Parry would have been the perfect man to give them. His presentation on knowledge cartels illustrated the damages that are being caused by extended copyright terms. He shows how little information is actually reaching the public domain due to the 'rights' that these big corporations have on material they didn't even create.

Parry should not have been the one to make this argument in court. Lessig's level head and professional diction would have gotten him farther than turning to the audience and yelling "Everyone Pirate Information!" Claims made in this manner and terms like 'pirate' will turn people away and make them disregard his argument. Lessig even mentioned that it was clear the Chief Justice thought they were "a bunch of anarchists" (239). If Parry was among them, this would have been confirmed.

Lessig was close. He had valid points but they were lost in the fray. Without illustrating the dangers, without making them care, the Justice's did very little to see the deeper connections within Lessig's argument. Parry is able to capture the audience's attention immediately but fails to recognize that people respond well when you tell them to break the law. The two of them together would have been the perfect amount of street and book smarts. They could have crafted an alarming argument, that grabs the attention of the court, illustrating how these extensions are going to ruin this country. Then they could have revealed the history that reinforces the unconstitutional nature of the law.

Hopefully someone will get another crack at copyright laws in a case like this one. Hopefully they will be able to show the harm copyright laws are inflicting on our society and offer a reasonable solution that will aid progress in the future.