Lapas attēli

Vational Association of Elementary School Principals.
National A cation of Schools of Muste.
Vattenal (Catholic Educational Association.
Valupal (atholic Welfare Conference.
National Commission for Libraries and Information Science.

tonal Contemporary Theatre Conference.
National Council for the Sexial Studies
asal Council of Teachers of English
National Education Aviation of the l'nited States.
Vatta1 Piiblic Radio,
Xaforal Scho Berard, Association.
Patic Broadcasting Service
serh Communication Association,

[ocr errors]


Alertan Asweciation of l'niversity Professora.
A.Puan liome Economics Asociation.
American Personnel and Guidance Association.
Aceiation of American Law Schools
A altet for durvisjon and ('urriculum I hevelopment,
Betal fomnunications ('ommission.

at al Congres of l'arents and Teachers.
Mr. STEINBACIL. I would like to add that the ad hoc committee will
not addrra it-elf today to the question of in-tructional broadcasting
Ima ime we have been assured that this matter will be considered at a
later intr, at which time we will be given an opportunity to speak to

It im 1. pleasure now to introduce Prof. LOJ. Ra-kind, professor view. (niverity of Minnesota, representing the Assoxíation of A" Law School, the American Anxition of University Pro. frowy, a': 1 the American Council on Education, the Joint ('opy. ri! (11.!!.itter for thump three organizations.

The prepared statement of Leo J. Ruskind follows:]

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

to tri #!

rd aerial from the art of the Ciprig'it #taule Wartort vrtu then hatile to tlor han prrular tat l.. ale t

in 18

al **Brytartit for state and

tinatbot I tv, we are tlls furtica

a matter of principle, as a matter of public policy, as well as a matter of w? interest. There are among our membership authors whose works cotinu prices in the commercial book market; many of our authors write for trebui journals without compensation.

Our main concern is to stress before this Committee the sound of two ditional, judicially constructed doctrine of fair use and to illustrate its lar? mental significance in the process of higher education.

As has been recognized throughout this extended process of revising the region right Law, a statutory recognition of the doctrine of fair use is pn firarilo continued reliance upon case law development. As the Senate Report as tree! . put it, “...there are few if any judicial guidelines. ..." bearing direction the usage of teachers and libraries in the educational and research met which is our concern, See, S. Rept. No. 93-983, 93rd Cong., 20 Sen 116 1134 Given the paucity of decided cases in this area, it is necessary to recogide lado difficulty of leaving the resolution of this important problem solely to the land Iramework of existing decisions. We urse, therefore, the enactment of 1012 now appears in H. 23, 91th Cong., 1st Sess., as supported by adequate lex. tire history.

The rerent decision of the Court of Claims in Williams & Wilkins (or te States, 497 F. 2d 1343 (Ct. C1. 1973), afl o by an equally divided court, 43 ISIN 431+ (1973), underscores the significance of the fair use doctrine to the mal tional and research community. By its a tria nre of this ('ourt of (laims (184", the the Supreme Court has left the resolution of this problem to the ('ongres

In seeking to have codified the traditional fair use doctrines, adequately st; ported hy legislative hisiary, we are loved by the primary inmirtalin Us availability of copyrighted material to our teaching and rearch duties in and most basic is the fact that the higher education community on when the al we appear today, consists of those institutions in our mirty charmed with the ultimale task of transmitting and advancing knowledge. I emphasize ne search and teaching : each function is indispensable to and suppriie o. other. Effective instruction of the nert generation of citizens and profe : 01. THvires that the current generation of teachers be inrolsed as rewar brot !! Irontiers of their own individual subjent areas. If the individual 1 dis barge this fundamental research obligation, that teacher must be hep ab of the current developments within a given discipline. This nexwari nyin the tracker to hare available the work product of allied reariler

The exponential rate of growth of knowledge expresi in tangible form dor* this generation, requires that this information be available to the teacher abd'** sholar. As the volume of published material has rised, the library budgeten collegey and universities are increasingly popped. The typical library of a la rhol must pind a substantial portion of its annual budget nerely to kraj current in holding of state and federal reports as well as statuts, trea'mothy and looselent werVICE**

In Its support of higher education, ont ide its concern with copyright law (anxre has reliZ* this bic thrilnial rutruint 13.1 in it

ly ments to the lixher Fucation let of 113 (and related ac'), ('81** sorted networks for the shared 4 of library materials (among other fariis', 1 Nertion 11x330a) of litle *0

C A . 1974) giurid* as fol

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

(1) A) falnt ne of facilitin such as ... Librario, including law isbraries ... lud:11 Joint use of necessary D k

Arnimmt the backround of this clear, prir pyron 1:10ring “hard ****,

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

We oppose the enactinent of $ 105 (B) (1) as presently proposed, because it kindum an inarticulate and troublesome concept of concertad reproduction": Ir 000wider the reference to "systematic reproduction' in $10SK) 2) to be y'ally vague and treublemutne.

I! is saibrant that the Senate Report No. 83 993, 230 ('ong.. 30 Sexs. 122 119.4), states of the ideutical text of JONOK) which appmarni in s 101:

Howpier, neither a watute nor legislative history oun "wcity prody w linh Library beloxopying practices constitute the making of "single copies" a dis. ta'lishird froth mystematic reprinduction." (At p. 122.)

We urge that the legislative history to $ 119 retiert this concern with unduir Hattar & 1107 We object to the examples of fermienible shared library Uvane urder on offered in the above Senate Report, in that they are misleading '10 Ilop exteut that they would guide a court in the interpretation of the phrase

m.4116 reproduction.** this statement of lekiniative intent din NO without ary testertian of the interest of the teacher and scholar to have basie material ale uvaliable. Moreover, the present expression of legislative punjiv utuli Can I dies no untion of the considerutious of the liigher Education Art's

l ue our preferent that the text of the present los be mollfind as we sale 11.0untad alone and that the lexinlative history of this provide riber't the dual (Ufuerus of the teacher and scholars ned for the arailability of publiwlard n'a rials as well as the tlucation Art's directive for shared Unce. It mis tu un at the examples in the prenent Senate Raport kive little if any Wright to Law basic ctsideration.

on the standpunt of the teacher and the numarcher, the doctrine of fair use 3. te arn free of effective limitations on library pract 10* Atalabaty of Astary materials remaidim bave {

mb to the teaching and reneurih fube tarte of tutust education community. A teacher in a wall private or public unit r y borward in the Null'heastern sart of the initt Natrs, may find tunt a work Awal to a current n warhanterest is to be found only at a universitat . 11:* 4.* * to tlar Sartheast 'I hat teacher may be to obtain only eie cate of # or a f*

w ars of either a book or a periodini liaving such material

#ital this stofundata available. A definition of fair use which left un vrtain 1.raa.sabity of such material, era il photo typied, would frustrate the purDer ur.derlying both the fair tine detrine and the fundamental multi:& to

de med adatai Arrelse by the univerity community. 4.

) we woud request that the beginda'ile history of # j a tlapunch !crariy rate tl. 111.*rtnic (f the avaituty of library and archival

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

te kurr as w at Indel, it is likely that having the trefit of a barrett fr u se of tips , aptr with its fu..title, va a irrifa: 1. kort

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

in the overwhelming proportion of cases, any possible adverse effect on the # nomic interest of a proprietor will be nil or virtually so. On balance, such Bar excerpts is likely to stimulate the sales of the material in the long run.

We should like to draw the Committee's attention to the forthcoming stod undertaken through the Copyright Office and the National Commission en braries and Information Science, of the library usage of copyrighted material both in the inter-library loan context as well as in meeting requests of sebe and research users. The feasibility of designing a "payments mechanism for such library uss is one aspect of this study.

It is our concern that a determination of the feasibility of some means of > pensation may serve to vacate the doctrine of fair use. We beliere such clusion would do great harm to the public interest in the promotion of em tion and scholarly activities. Moreover, such an outcome would inflit irtoate harın on the educational community without conferring a derivative beers C copyright proprietors.

We this advocate that the House Report which accompanies this messen be drafted to include an express reference to the effect that the doctrine of use would be applicable to copyrighted materials which might suh-471*nelse designated as compensable, if photocopied for other uses. By clearly establishing that teaching and rpparch Usre are significant to the doctrine of fair uie, sur quent uncertainty as to the treatment of library materials which might rye.Ne compensation if (pied for other purposes, would be avoided.

We consider that Chapter 5 of H. 2223 sets ont definitions of infringement syd renelies therefor, which are unduly restrictive of the doctrine of fair bee in the «duational context.

Acrordingly we urge modification of the present measure, as follows FR v ure that , 501(a) be modified by the addition of the following sentetido ten:mrary or final injunction shall be available against any library or u-erot ered by $ 105 or $ 110."

11 112 prent form, we believe $30212) of the prop**d measure wind mit the use of the injunction to undercut the effective (4** be tracheard

holar to the fair use provisions. We wonld point to the with rawat tyre ***** of injunctive relier akainutllective organizational artivity in the fu*** relations area by the Sorris-LaGuardia . 47 Stat. 70 (183);9 PN . $ lui 1973). It is our position that the parailel should carry over here. 'lle >> statutory framework controlling labor relations is the Labour Relations statri thell * * We arge that the fair ose detrine of the propwd mener de PDiftipul as the mie frannework for governing the use of copyrighted buenas in the viucational context by track and wholars.

o ndly, we consider that the damasis provision of $5014(e) (2) al rebus urn the fair use doctrine of $ 107. We urge a change in the last = telp of this provision lwginning at line 13 on page 49. In line 18, we wild perfet that the riierence to $107 be deleted in favor of the phrase "$ 107 threb 117." 'ihen we would urge that all languake on line is after the phrase "ti, in the current version, be deleted in its place we would up the following final 2.1. vage as follows: *there shall be Deither statutory damag***, nor aner, DU attui lae%* (.**


Mr. R«-KIND. As Jir. Steinharh has said, Mr. (hairman and mello ber of the sulmommittee, I am professor of law at the l' nirer! of 11.1.11nria. I altar before you tonur on behalf of theme organ:23tion: The Immation of Amran Law Schools, the Amerun A**"lation of Inventy Professor and the American Council on Education. We truunt, as a law whoola-Oiation, for some 6.) law teaterThe Imerlian 1« ation of University Professors com. primi sume 13,1*) other university profesors. The American Council

on Ex}uation is an a-sociation of national and regional education organizations, and nearly 1,100 institutions of higher education.

We appear before you beca11-e of our concern over the rivision of de doctrine of fair use in relation to our function. May I draw to your attention, on page 2 of my statement, to the second paragraph; ra note above the constitutional directive contained in article I, seetion 8, clause 8, of Congress' concern in this area of assuring to authors and others the rights to their writings

As the higher education community, we are the principal institution concerned in this society with the task of transmitting and advaning knowledge. It is for that use that we deem the problem of fair 1 of copyrighted material as crucial to the discharge of this function.

Asa classroom teacher with some 20 years' experience in law loo's and departments of economics, I am here to assert to you that without the doctrine of fair use, adequately deribed in the statute, and supported by articulate legislative history, what we do would be grously impeded without any derivative benefit to publishers and others

We use this material and examples of our use suggents that the students, who are the ultimate consumers of our concern as try! 1078 are bol, at the time that they are students, potential nurlar to t'juuruals for which protection is sought. Many of the journal-I liif magazine, for example-recognize the students' status by offer.

patent sulmeriptions. Many learned journals offer suluse pirns. We are only asking through the doctrine of fair use, as remaren

I ! w wars, to advance knowledge by having made available to 1, in the library contert, materials which our libraries do not have, Dhen that's how good they are. The l’niversity of Minnesota has a to gela ir library, but we do not have everything. On occaxion it is 1. mars for me, if I am writing an article, to have information from PHP. P libraries. That is the main nub of our concern with the dortune of it's ppWe think it is crucial for the discharge of our terhing Blitarch. We do not see that it infringes on the economie rights

I draw your attention, on page 2, in the third paragraph, that we Te recognize that we do not wck to have removed from copy. ri! pogosterton banje material under the statute. We srcept this por as a mintter of principle and a matter of public policy and a !'ter of elf internt. Inwyere, we recognize case law and I draw

eye mlantion, now, to the part to the last paragraph on page 2 i'arrot 1.8 state of can law in this arra is not articulate, subroi Artimulate, to deal with fair up and describe it.

Tror fore, we ure that this revision proces produire a statutory proine of fair nors and it be deal hy laminative history that

i r interpretation of it I pint out to you further. I will not read this statement: I will . po merize it and make mulf Arnilahile to your questions that Pos !-, 15-!. Al point out on the ! **om of payment, enate rond, ef

wind 11 ETNI drewning that, as grilor, nur lifraries do not have arrinte troury and cannot *** poate fpasset proper for prrrr library to have a total collection !1!t!. is needed for teaching and raanh.

[ocr errors]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »