No Copyright for Pornography: A Response to File-Sharing Litigation (2012)
From the article:<p><i>&gt; The strength of a defense based on the non-copyrightability of pornography rests on whether pornography promotes the progress of science and useful arts as prescribed by the Copyright Clause of the U.S. Constitution.</i><p><i>&gt; An argument in favor of refusing copyright protection is the very reason why copyright protection is granted in the first place: it gives incentives for creation.</i><p><i>&gt; Allowing copyright protection on pornographic works, then, would only give more incentive for pornographic creations.</i><p>That&#x27;s a losing battle right there.<p>First because the Supreme Court already affirmed adult entertainment as encompassed by the first amendment.<p>Second because it is a dangerous precedence to remove legal protections off something based on subjective standards. Today it is for adult entertainment, tomorrow it could very well be (for instance) for political comedy.