The postm AP and its societas takes developments much as these intended to provide better accOUS SET vices to the purnais ia, of course a verable Invleed we are eager to see kuch samim growing and ; an to sup port them with the products and ser vw that are their raw mater.ais However just as with the Sovet pho toxopes and the use of copyrighted ab stracts mentuned earlier, we should be recompened for subscriptum jest be cused these services if we are to ma n'a a financial viability The financial situation How much money as involved in inst submer.ptarma from say just the Three the USSR on their photocopied inurnal * We in we have a $X X rach year! And her The man ing ab an of !FF"v negotiating tram as they were stated during the summer of 19 That team agreed with the concept ATP receiving 3. 10:000 per year for the tend the mputer tape and therefore assume this to be a riməm ext mate of the annual ions in AfÌ” i5 My third example above cover tan cover reprod actine of articles from AIP and society, murals, pyes nae to a loss of incrime that is much harder to figure than it was the the first two examples The ions of subscriptions that the AIP and its member societies have suffered over the last five years has been sub stantial see figure 1 We have set about 20% of the total number of subscript,ina we had in 906 Domestic non member and member suript acım Sommes account for most of the decine, while furegn script and total Borsety membership have been rea tively stabie We therefore make the umptam that the subscriptio ☐ attributable largely to wh expying of single artic. by hat ta time in the s An est mate of kar value of the submit for this reason is about $40X JOC per year The total estimated is for these three effects in than about 8 m per year arent mate that a ado vad per year by crude If this money were available the steve 'u A'j' and to AIP and the memberian paga www.ting from dawning charges to authors and hecrigant >FX for P45 prees to readers could both be deank at the eased with obvious benefits for the Mr. DANIELSON. Thank you. Now, Mr. Lieb and Mr. Hoopes, you both referred to an item that troubles me here, the definition of "systematic reproduction," what do you mean by that? And please give it to me kind of quickly, if you could. Mr. LIEB. When a library, whether it is the large central research library, or the mother library in the network, when by plan or effect it regularly produces copies-regularly as distinguished from sporadically or on occasional instances-regularly produces copies which are provided to the user in lieu of the original, the book or the journal Mr. DANIELSON. You are talking about a continuing operation, as opposed to an intermittent or sporadic one. Mr. LIEB. Correct, and the Senate report makes that clear. Mr. KARP. I would quickly refer you to the Senate report; it gives the general definition as an example. Mr. DANIELSON. You are adopting the definition, then, in the Senate report. Mr. KARP. And I would point out that the Senate then urged the parties to sit down and work out more detailed guidelines. Mr. DANIELSON. Funny they should have that foresight because I'm on the verge of making that same request. [Laughter.] So, could you consider that request as having been renewed? Mr. Lieb, was copying of the type we were discussing today a significant problem before the advent of the quick copying equipment? Mr. LIEB. I don't think so, sir. Mr. DANIELSON. I am going to make an observation, then. Quick copying is here to stay; in fact, it is going to get quicker, and easier, and better; it is bound to. So, I think what we have to do, instead of fighting the inevitable like the motion pictures fought television for a long time-we just have to find a way where we can accommodate this thing, and live with it. Copying is not going to go away. Mr. HOOPES. That's right, Mr. Chairman, and that is precisely our position. The publishers are in no way opposed to wide dissemination; we would simply like a reasonable licensing arrangement to cover works that are going to be copied in very large quantities; that is to say, under systematic copying arrangements. Mr. DANIELSON. I was glad to hear that other people don't worry about the first amendment because I find it quite a problem in this committee. One other item I had here. What about page charges, Dr. Cairns? Dr. CAIRNS. The page charge came to the fore in about 1962 and applied, I think, almost entirely to the publication of technical societies, which was honored by a Government policy, which was first enunciated in 1964 by the Federal Council on Science and Technology, which allowed the page charges which were in the order of $20 to $50 a page, printed page, of a publication, allowed this as a valid charge against research grants of Federal agencies. It was subsequently then reissued in slightly modified form by Dr. Guy Stevers within the past year. That charge was studied by the technical societies, and generally speaking it is not mandatory; in other words, publication proceeds, even though page charges are not honored. But it is a source of income. Mr. DANIELSON. To whom? Mr. LIEB. To the societies who are publishing journals, and is entered into the budget of the general publication. Mr. DANIELSON. What does the author of these articles derive in the way of monetary or other valuable considerations? Mr. LIEB. He gets fame and prestige. Mr. DANIELSON. That's what I thought. Dr. CAIRNS. That is the name of the game. Mr. DANIELSON. Oh, I have written a few, and I received exactly the same amount. [Laughter.] Mr. KARP. Speaking for the authors, let me make this point. First of all, I should point out Mr. DeCassey who sits behind me represents the-association, no, page charges are not available from Government grants to commercial publishers, for profit. Mr. DANIELSON. By "society" you are talking about a so-called nonprofit organization. Mr. KARP. The point I would make is this. First of all, the amendments and exemptions proposed by the library associations apply to all single copying, a tremendous amount of which is done of literary and artistic material, short stories, essays, the works; those authors write for money. As Dr. Cairns has pointed out, there is a very definite monetary motive for authors to write. Mr. DANIELSON. One last question. In the type of copying that we are talking about, technical journals and the like, as opposed to the ones Mrs. Linden will tell us about tomorrow, which cover the whole gamut of intellectual products, who are the users in the sense ofare they something scandalous like "The Scarlet Letter" or are they truly technical books? Who uses them, in the sense of what category of person uses those copies? Dr. CAIRNS. I didn't hear what you said. Mr. DANIELSON. Are we talking about fiction here, or are we talking about strictly technical types of information? In the Constitution it says here, "To promote the progress of science and the useful arts"; now, are we talking about "Gone With the Wind," or are we talking only about Dr. CAIRNS. What we are talking about are the general terms of science. I think Mrs. Linden spoke about the useful arts. Mr. DANIELSON. We have a quorum call on. Thank you very much for your patience. You know, by holding over for 12 minutes you got exactly your allocated amount of time. I appreciate your help very much; I'm sorry we couldn't give you more time. Just winding up, tomorrow we will meet again, at 10 o'clock, and for the record, we have statements from the American Business Press, the Federal Librarians Association, the Special Libraries Association, the Wisconsin Interlibrary Loan Service, Music Library Association, Association of Research Libraries, Williams & Wilkins Co., American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Advocates for the Arts. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Dr. Ray Woodriff. Montana State University, and the American Association of Law Libraries. [The following statements were received for the record:] |