It is equally meretricious to complain that the "systematic copying" that i to be paid for is too imprecisely defined, or that payment cannot be made becau payment systems have not been established. Section 108(g) excludes from library copying privileges not only "systema"r copying" but also the related or concerted reproduction or distribution of `tiple" copies. Systematic copying and multiple copying are general concepts, beti are illustrated by examples in the Senate committee report (which closely follows the discussion of fair use in your 1967 committee report), and neither is mere Imprecise than many other statutory or common law doctrines with which we are all familiar. The libraries do not claim an inability to understand the multipee copying concept; the systematic copying concept is no less viable or understandable. What is missing of course is agreement among the parties to flesh out the statute-not only to formulate photocopying guidelines for the assistance of library patrons and employees, but to establish workable clearance and licensing procedures as well. This is what your committee recommended in 1967 and this is what the Senate committee recommended in 1974. Had this been accomplished, we would not be here today. It has not been accomplished, and Mr. Hoopes in his testimony will place the blame squarely where it belongs. REPORT TO THE COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION FROM THE The Copyright Revision bill, S. 1361, which, due chiefly to the cable TV controversy, has resided in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee during all of 'ast year and up to this date in this year, now gives evidence of beginning to move. The full Senate Judiciary Committee reported it out on July 3 and this last Monday issued the accompanying Senate Report (S. Rept. 93-953) explaining the legislative intent in its passage. It will now probably come to the floor of the Senate and be passed within the next month to six weeks, We have had many conversations with the members of the Senate Subcommittee in the past several months about provisions in the bill affecting photocopying in Libraries. We now have provisions permitting photocopying of archival material copying of material for preservation, freedom of liability for copying done by users on coin-operated machines on library premises, and the highly important provision permitting the making of single copies for normal interlibrary loan work. On the other hand, we have not been able as yet to reach agreement en systematic copying," a term used to describe copying in a system or network where one library agrees to discontinue its subscription to a journal and depend on another library in the network to supply photocopies of articles from this journal when needed. Copyright proprietors, rightly or wrongly, believe such systems or networks constitute a potential threat to their rights and want to prohibit such copying by them without some sort of license. We of course would like to see as few restrictions as possible placed on dissemination of information through cooperative effort. In its report, the Judiciary Committee, In an effort to remove this impasse, recommended that "representatives of authors, book and periodical publishers and other owners of copyrighted material meet with the library community to formulate photocopying guidelines to assist library patrons and employees. “ We believe that such conferences can be promoted best through the office of some Interested but impartial individual and believe that Miss Barbara Ringer as Register of Copyrights, wou'd be an ideal person for this Not only does she have the confidence of both librarians and publishers in her fairness and impartiality, but she is also far and away the most experienced of anyone in the country in the area of both domestic and foreign copyright. In trying thus to meet the recommendations of the Senate Committee in this rerend and to accomplish what we hope will be of benefit to all, we ask Council to transmit the following request to the Register of Copyrights. The American Library Association urges the Register of Coperights to arranco In such wars a deemed feasible and appropriate conferences between representafives of authors and book and periodical publishers and of the library community to resolve so far as possible the different interests in copyright legislation, to Institute studies of related problems, and to promote understanding on the part of the general public of the many complexities inherent in the copyright problem. Presented to American Library Association Council, July 12, 1974. TESTIMONY OF ROBERT W. CAIRNS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY Dr. CAIRNS. I'm Robert Cairns, and I have a very lengthy statement, which I will obviously not have time to present; I would like to submit it for the record. Mr. DANIELSON. Without objection, it will be received in the record. I would appreciate it if you would give us a "once over lightly," I am sure you know the contents. Dr. CAIRNS. I will do so. I have a summary, and I'll even have to summarize the summary, Mr. DANIELSON. Fine. Dr. CAIRNS. First of all, I would like to introduce my colleagues here, on my right, Dr. Richard Kenyon, who is director of our division of communications. And behind me is Dr. Stephen Quigley, who is direc tor of our department of chemistry and public affairs, and Mr. William Butier, representing Mr. Arthur Hanson, general counsel of our Perhaps the main objective of the American Chemical Society is the increase and diffusion of chemical knowledge Mr. DANIELSON. Your objection! Dr. CAIRNS, Our principal objective. Mr. DANIELSON. Thank goodness. [Laughter.] Dr. CAIRNS [continuing). That lays emphasis on the fact that we are interested very strongly in the dissemination of scientific knowlevig. Mr. DANIELSON. That is the only basis under which we can have a copyright law, as I read the Constitution. Dr. CAIRNS. Throughout the past 99 years, the American Chemical Sety approach to achieving this objective has been to gather, to evaluate, to organize, and to control new scientific information into a form useful for publication, then to publish journals 16 in testaber, I believe - and deliver it to the scientific world, that is our post oll, In providing a record of new setentific knowledge and natang the basis upon which it is gathered, evaluated, and organized for p.b. Iation, the journals provide a constantly updated authoritative consensus of universally accepted knowledge in the fields concerned. We ean speak, I think, on this theme for a great many scientific son jetærs atough we are one of the largest. The integral part played by sientific journals and seentific res warch renders them indispensible for our way of bfe. These tampo nils provide the knowledge base for techn: al developnest, for ansvers to urgent † roblens ficed in the United States and the rest of the world, an has the energy eris, the world food prol leta, the delivery of adequate health service, and pollution alaterent, It is critically important that this system of organizing evaluatie, and providing scientific information rema n hexit) y, t'at is our tra entertion. Now, the central argument focusing on photocopying is essential.y an economic one. I wish to call your attention particularly to t critical problem provided by the cost of bringing the research journal through the process of editing, collecting and evaluation, compositio and other production steps, up to the point of being ready to pri the first copy. These costs are what we call "first-copy costs." In o system in making scientific information broadly available is to cettinue, we must continue to find ways to support these first-copy costs, as well as to pay the costs of the journals actually printed and delivered. We are finding that subscriptions to our journals are decreasing. Since 1969, subscriptions have decreased from 12 to 18 percent. For example, the Journal of the American Chemical Society, which is our prestige journal, has dropped from almost 20,000 down to a little below 16,000 subscribers as of the end of 1974. The Journal of Organic Chemistry has dropped from 10,500 to 9,500; the Journal of Physical Chemistry from 6,500 to 5,500; others have declined comparably. If users are allowed, without paying for the journal, to receive copies of the journal papers, it is not likely that they will subscrive to the journal. Under such conditions, paid subscriptions can be expected to continue to drop rapidly. While replacement of actual printed copies of the journal by photocopies would reduce the cost to the user, the large costs referred to as "first-copy costs" would remain uncompensated, it would have to be distributed over a decreasing number of journal subscriptions, and the result would be very expensive journals. This would mean that the cost would fall on the relatively small number of individual organizations which would continue to subscribe to the journal. Otviously, a continuous trend in that direction would threaten the economic stability of the journal system. If, on the other hand, the copyright law is designed to require pay, ment for photocopying of papers from journals of an adequate and equitable charge for the copy, this would distribute the cost of the tem more equitably over those who benefit from it. The objective is not to prevent such photocopying, but, rather, to provide support for the basic costs of developing scientific information for distribution, thus keeping the journal system viable as a base from which the im proving technologies for improved dissemination can draw; the result would be a more effective and more lasting total information system. Now, there are a couple of studies to which I make reference in my main report. One, that the interlibrary loan requests--by their own studies-grew from $59,000 reenests in 1965 to double that figure in 1969, with projections as high as 26 million in 1974 75. So, the are getting up into millions, ati milions, and millions of intereary Joans, to give you an order of magnitude; and that is froin their own data. In another study the author discussed service by pos bly a national Fal resources center. They estimated that from the collection settes the demand will start growing in the range of 380) win t'e 1st year, to a range from “5, to 5 million in the oth year. Yet, 90 percent of these would be filled by protocop es. These figures give you some ind extion of the merase in capacity of the mfort, ation. However, it is reasonable to expect that the number of journal -1.ptions from which those will be provided will be much smaller t at the present. Iere have been objections that any system of licensing or fees for focopies would encourage excessive administrative costs. Howes, a study of the elements and possible systems for licensing and motion of fees for photocopies has been developed by a working grt of librarians and publishers of the Conference on the Resolut of Copyright Issues under the chairmanship of the National Cresson on Libraries and Information Science-plans are now hg developed for testing such proposed systems as a means of น gpost how t'e process may be carried out in an economically flon. I ave here Dr. Kenyon who is a member of that working group a: 1.e will be glad to answer specific questions on that system. Despite reservations on some segments of this bill, the American cal Society recommends passage of the sections of H.R. 2223 to library photocopy g. This recommendation is made with teb of, based on work with the Conference on the Resolution of Convr grit Isnjes, that a practicable system for licensing and fee colFor for 1otocorites of copyrighted works can be developed, which i fara de table charges for systematic photocopying in terest of an improved and economically viable system for the disot on of se ent fie information. Mr. Dexterson. Thank you very much. You have 215 minutes left. Parerg the clock in thick of the room. Would you like to yield ין D: KINyon, Roland Kenyon. I would like to make a comment on Mr. DANTESON Without obie tion we can receive it in our files I www 't we!},6' I ju ́t how much we want to print in the record The stall ani men's os have ha la chance to go over it. I do thank 1 i form avangat available trough. [See app 31 De Corpss I think Lean summarize by saying that I think we enn workout a system which use for ally viable, and contine to sipteafuota, la er, elitors, nudi members of the .ent.fic community at M» Desterren. Thank you very noch, Dr Carps Ie prep and statement of Dr. Rert W. Cantos follows) Mr Chairman and members of the Nulwommittee My name is Robert W. Como I am the Fieni ve Director of the American Chenddeal Sowfety and with *@_a_‚"` criza1ion of ita Board of Directors, I appear before you ↑ way to present the Society's statement. I have spent 37 years in industry and retired as 1. President of Hercules Incorporated on July 1, 1971, to accept the positi Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Science and Technology. I 19signed from that position on December 1, 1972, on acceptance of my preset! 1,pointment. Accompanying me today are Dr. Richard L. Kenyon, Director of "a" Public, Professional and International Communication Division, Dr. Stephen ¦ Quigley, Director of the Department of Chemistry and Public Affairs, and M. William B. Butler, representing Mr. Arthur B. Hanson, General Counsel of "e Society. We appreciate being given this opportunity to comment on certain fet of the Copyright Revision Bill, H.R. 2223. The issues addressed by this leg sa are both fundamental to the formulation of national science policy, and of vi significance with respect to the ability of our Society to resolve many of the pr lems which confront it. These issues have been under discussion for some ** now by the Committee on Copyrights of the Board of Directors and Council of `.❤® American Chemical Society, as well as by other similar scientific societies, asla general consensus on them has been under development. This consensus his heers developed in the context that the protection of copyrighted material wil "pr mote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts", as specified in Article I, Sect, 1 8. Clause & of the Constitution of the United States. The viewpoint which we at tempt to express is that of the chemical, scientific and technological comm nity, as represented by the American Chemical Society. The American Chemical Society is incorporated by the Federal Congress 25 2. non-profit, membership, scientific, educational society composed of chemists an. chemical engineers, and is exempt from the payment of Federal income taxes under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. The American Chemical Society consists of more than 107,000 such abire described members. Its Federal Charter was granted by an Act of the Congres in Public Law 358, 75th Congress, 1st Session, Chapter 762, H.R. 7700, sigtet into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 25, 1937, to bec effective from the first day of January, 1938. Section 2 of the Act is as follows: "Sec. 2. That the objects of the incorporation shall be to encourage in the broadest and most liberal manner the advancement of chemistry in all its branches; the promotion of research in chemical science and industry: the improvement of the qualifications and usefulness of chemists through higả standards of professional ethics, education, and attainments; the increase 3.-1 diffusion of chemical knowledge; and by its meetings, professional contacts reports, papers, discussions, and publications, to promote scientific interests and inquiry, thereby fostering public welfare and education, aiding the development of our country's industries, and adding to the material prosperity and happiness of our people." Its Federal incorporation replaced a New York State Charter, which had been effective since November 9, 1877. One of the principal objects of the Society, as set forth in its Charter, is "e dissemination of chemical knowledge through its publications program. The budget for the Society for the year 1975 exceeds $39,000,000 of which more than $30,000,000 is devoted to its publications program. The Society's publication program now includes three magazines and seventeen journals, largely scholarly journals that contain reports of original resear from such fields as medicinal chemistry, biochemistry, and agricultural and food chemistry, as well as a weekly newsmagazine designed to keep chemists as chemical engineers abreast of the latest developments affecting their science and related industries. In addition, the Society is the publisher of Chemical Abstri **, one of the world's most comprehensive abstracting and indexing services. I'e funds to support these publications are derived chiefly from subscriptions. The journals and other published writings of the Society serve a very im portant function, namely: they accomplish the increase and diffusion of chron ical knowledge from basic science to applied technology. In so doing, they must generate revenue, without which the Society could not support and en tinue its publications program in furtherance of its Congressional Charter 10 serve the science and technology of chemistry. The protection of copyright his proved an essential factor in the growth and development of the scientis publishing program of the Society. The twenty periodical publications of the Society produce more than 40000 pages a year and subscriptions in 1974 totalled 323,000, Chemical Abstracts annually produces more than 140,000 pages which go to 5,300 subscribers. Its |