Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

P

to embrace common law copyright, i.e., unpublished works. See e.g., Porter Hel. v. l'nited States, 473 F 20 13:29, 117 'SL'Q 238 (CA 5 1973). Since HR protects unpublished as well as published works, the Government s liabutis be extended. It is urged that 28 t'.S.C. 1498 (b) be amended so that it putin to restrict the Government's liability for copyright iufringement to "pulita works only. Government agencies receive a voluminous amount of Interiai ir private sources which does not bear a copyright notice and which is reps xv1 distributed, etc, in its day-to-day business activities, for example, Chile Freedom of Information Act. It would be extremely dithcult, if bol inf***,,, to ascertain whether the material submitted has been published with do 21.6 to claim copyright, or whether it is unpublished and the owner intends to wa copyright protection.

The effect of compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FULL the Government's liability for copyright infringement also needs clari Ir a document requested unler the Fol. bars a copyright noflie, tlm 184 , ein beso advise and will 11- nally be able to secure a copy finu here. Ito the document requested contains 10 Prrigit notice, it may be an un d work subject to protection under tlie pr

copyright resisjon; and pan1i1.6 apps or a (py Nar very well frustrate the top right owner de ma . 8971 iert the Goveruntnt to liability. We are concerned wliether the fur! of a () of a document by the loverunnent under the FOLI will it ! a lle, or a form of fair line. Of tourse, if a doxnuent is relea

* FOL the Griperuenit may not impli reititt ituse by othex, Fos cirro! ! purpis, it is routeud. d till language insesteei in HR. 3 er ! ! : thie fiir 114 dmtrine's abirialliti to publislied works and the Goverheid release of deuruents under the FUA Innent Infringere

linder Sec. 2007b) an inn'went iniringis who acts in rilinnee 1999 authorized or plot oreri fi, wlih tip copyright no lielva I.*. and who prove that he was uiled by the own , is sliiallid from hii for actual or statutory dla! 2** with respect to any infringing pyrom (Y.." wfure receiving artdal nation of registration. No pritection in ***** , ve! prord **ilation for an inaux******t infringer who relis on an ***** cuts or p roprio a philimll-work from which the put right n o !. ben onlitt1; or for an ilia 316 ini,inger (of an unpubli k , 1 , who relits tiu a copy or photosetord which has been published without a .. of the outer. Publieations Incorporating I'orks in the Public Domain

Ser. 4613 of UR 33 protile that when a work is published in copies of pokerrurds ($, till retwyferan'ly of one or more Government will molleys of koprisutoll also include a titeixint identifying the portions ifte ing work protected under Titie 17. It is NISA's opinion that Sec. 4133 1* : liented at that it would be in the public instrtext to require that it ! e ) # pop* a *tok (

u nt prefwindlerantly 9 aur baterial that is in the pribile donsin Weg fant-nd ta em*, 40131 ncluded oy adding the phrase "f Won In the blir d. 121n'aiter te word "Work in the heading and before i words "lie burtie in liue 3 of the body of the section.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

In the event 28 ('.S.C. 1498(a) is amended as set forth in Sec. 232, it is recommended that the phrase "described in and covered by a patent of the United Statex" be inserted after the word "invention" in the first line. This will reinstate the language present in the current law with respect to patented inventions and which was probably inadvertently omitted. Omitting this language might be interpreted as a broadening of the Government's liability to cover unpatented ini putions.

Subject to the foregoing, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration would have no oljection to the enactment of II.R. 223.

The Office of Management and Budget has advised that, from the standpoint of the dininistruiion's program, there is no objection to the submission of this report to the Congress. Sincerely,

JOSEPH P. ALLEN,
Assistant Administrator

for Legislative Affairs. [Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m. the hearing adjourned to reconvene at 10 a.m. on Jay 11, 1974.]

COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION

COTION OF?, LIBEN

WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 1975

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, CIVIL LIBERTIES,
AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m. in room 2.226, Rayburn House Office Building, Ilon. Robert W. Kastenmeier [chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Kastenmeier, Danielson, Pattison, and Jazzoli.

Also present: Herbert Fuchs, counsel, and Thomas E. Mooney, associate counsel.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. The hearing will come to order on the third mouning of hearings on copyright law revision. The issue under discussion lends itself into equal division of time between those in favor and those opposed; each side will be invited to divide 30 minutes of testimony among its members, and you will be expected to stay within that time frame.

This morning six national library associations have given their entire half-hour to Mr. Edmon Low. Thereafter four representatives of writers and publishers will share their 30 minutes in arguing the other side of the library photocopying issue.

Furthermore, the Chair will announce that the chairman and perhaps another member of the committee will have to excuse themselves for the purpose of appearing before the Rules Committee on the question of the Parole Reorganization Act this morning, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Danielson, will preside during that period of absence of the Chair.

Before introducing the first witness, I would like to vield to our Judiciary Committee colleague from Kentucky, Mr. Mazzoli, for the introduction of one of the witnesses.

Mr. Mazzoli. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, I appreciate your willingness to yield today. I would like to just take this chance to introduce to you and your distinguished subcommittee a lady who is from my district and with whom I spend many hours on airplanes, flying back and forth from the District of Columbia to Louisville, our home.

Mrs. Joan Titley Adams, Mr. Chairman, is testifying in your first panel today, and without taking any more of your valuable time, I would just like to commend her testimony because she is a professor at the University of Louisville, as well as being the librarian of the

(183)

Sciences Library. She has been in the Medical Library Association in virtually all of its positions, including the board of directors. She likewise hoids positions in the University of Louisville on its faculty senate. And without necessarily knowing all the nuances of the bill before you, which is very complicated, I would like to commend her testimony.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. KASTENMEIER, Thank you for this introduction. I say to my colleague I am sorry we can't introduce all our witnesses as fully in terms of their biographies.

The Chair would like to welcome Mrs. Adams and Mr. Low. I understand Mr. Low this morning will make the major presentation on behalf of the libraries. Mr. Low, you may want to introduce your other colleagues. You may proceed as you wish. TESTIMONY OF EDMON LOW, REPRESENTATIVE OF SIX LIBRARY

ASSOCIATIONS Mr. Low. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Edmon Low, and I will today present the views of the American library cominunity as represented through six major library associations. With me are representatives of each of the six associations. I am happy to present to you Mr. Julius Marke, representing the law libraries and chairman of their copyright committee. Mr. McDonald, at my right, is the executive director of the Association of Research Libraries. At my left Mrs. Adams--and Mr. Mazzoli, we share your enthusiasm for Mrs. Adams and her work in our library community. Next is Mrs. Sommer, who is representing the Music Library Association, and wlio is the chairman of their copyright committee; and Mr. Frank McKenna, who is the executive director of the Special Libraries Association. And then with us we have the members of counsel, sitting behind us here, Mr. Sharaf, who represents the Harvard University Library; B1r. William North, representing the American Library Association, and Mr. Philip Brown, representing the Association of Research Libraries.

Vr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you.

Mr. Low. Because of our time limitation, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I shall omit some of my testimony and ask that this statement be admitted into the record.

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. Without objection, your statement in its entirety will be received in the record. You may proceed, sir.

Mr. Low. Thank you.

We are here today to talk about library copying and the provisions of the copyright revision bill, H.R. 2223. I shall be presenting, so far as I am able, the concerns of all these various library groups. However, each of these organizations will also be filing a statement of its own, setting forth in greater detail its individual concerns about provisions of the bill. All of the representatives will assist me in answering particular questions you may have concerning our testimony and the issues raised.

Although our testimony today is limited to library photocopying which is the subject of this hearing, there are other provisions of the bill which concern us, and about which we may be making further statements as other hearings are scheduled.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »