> “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8...
That is, the constitution grants Congress the authority to create a legislative IP right. It does not create a constitutional IP right.
You can tell, because Congress could say: “stuff it, no IP rights for anyone. Copyright no longer exists for new works”, and that would be constitutional.
Thus congress could specify that copyright only lasts for 1 month, but they can’t just ignore it or set it to 1 second without the courts getting involved.
For instance, if they think the value of IP to promoting the arts and sciences is reduced significantly by IP claimants committing perjury and abusing other people's freedom of expression, and that the situation needs a remedy.
There's nothing saying it has to be this way, merely that granting rights is a thing that can be done. Y'all can find this section of the constitution I'm sure, and it's dull but short! This is super up to the legislature, otherwise how would they have passed the DMCA in the first place? Of course they could make a law to revoke IP for any kind of thing they decide they need to -- like for national security:
"The Congress shall have Power To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."