Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-545.pdf
Page Number: 66

Cite as:  565 U. S. ____ (2012) 

21 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

those who are not themselves creators. 

Industry  witnesses  testified  that  with­

It  is  not  surprising  that  the  copyright  holders’  repre­
sentatives  who  appeared  before  Congress  did  not  empha­
size this argument.  (With one minor exception only those 
representatives appeared, see generally Joint Hearing; the 
Copyright Office did not testify, id., at 239.)  Rather, they
focused  on  the  Berne  Convention  itself.  By  that  time, 
Congress  had  already  protected  all  new  works  of  Berne 
members.  But it had not provided additional protection to
preexisting foreign works that were then in the American 
public  domain. 
drawing  such  works  from  the  American  public  domain 
would permit foreign copyright owners to charge American
consumers  more  for  their  products;  and  that,  as  a  result, 
the United States would be able to persuade foreign coun­
tries  to  allow  American  holders  of  preexisting  copyrights
to  charge  foreign  customers  more  money  for  their  prod­
ucts.  See  id.,  at  241  (statement  of  Eric  Smith,  Executive 
Director  and  General  Counsel,  International  Intellectual 
Property  Alliance)  (“[F]ailure  to  [comply  with  Article  18]
will . . . undermine the ability of the United States to press 
other countries to implement the same sort of protection in
their implementing legislation currently pending in many
legislatures  around  the  globe”);  id.,  at  253  (statement  of 
Matt  Gerson,  Vice  President  for  Congressional  Affairs,
Motion Picture Assn. of America) (similar).  See also id., at 
85 (statement of Xavier Becerra, House Judiciary Commit­
tee member) (“[R]etroactivity . . . is probably the best way 
to  ensure  that  some  of  our  older  American  works,  any­
thing from Motown, to ‘Star Trek,’ to ‘The Hardy Boys’ get
the protection in some of these emerging foreign markets. 
It is important to ensure that countries no longer use our 
U. S. law as an excuse for not extending retroactive copy­
right  protections  to  some  of  our  own  works”).    But  see 
id.,  at  272–279  (statement  of  Larry  Urbanski,  Chairman 
of  the  Fairness  in  Copyright  Coalition  and  President  of