from a collection of works by a single poet, short story writer, composer, photographer, painter, or lithographer, or from an anthology of works by many artists. In either case, an entire creative work would seem to be just as subject as an entire article from a scientific journal to photocopying and mailing to members of the general public. Instead of coming to the library personally to borrow and read the work, the library will give to the “borrower" a permanent personal copy. However, the composer, poet and short story writer are directly economically dependent on royalty income, based on the sale of their works to those who desire permanent personal copies. The photographer, the painter, and the lithographer Jealously reserve reproduction rights to their works and expect to be paid when they authorize reproduction by or for those who desire permanent personal if institutions will provide copies of specific works by creative artists upon request, why should anybody buy the entire magazine or paperback or hardcover book containing that specific work? Necessarily, publishers will sell fewer magaalles and books, artists will receive less royalty income, and their works will be widely reproduced and distributed without authorization from them or compensation to them. Again, for emphasis, we are not saying that the Williams and Wilkins case Created such a broad license. However, that decision was the last authoritative word on the subject of photocopying and has, we are fearful, created an atmos phere of photocopying promiscuousness. In sammary, we believe that an overly broad photocopying provision in the Copyright inw would be inconsistent with the philosophy of the Constitutional provision authorizing Congress to secure for authors copyright protection in order to “promote the progress of science and useful arts." We therefore recom Martd that adequate controls be placed on widespread photocopying of copyrighted works so that we retain the incentive for the creative artists to produce the art that is so necessary to the cultural environment of our country. STATEMENT OF DR. RAY Woodriff, Department oF CHEMISTRY, MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Enci med is a letter I received from the Mosby Publishing Company concerning HR 23 and 8 22, in particular sections 107 and 10%, "Fair Use." and "School and Library Photocopying" As an author, profesor, analytical chemist and user of dspirated copyright materials, I was very much alarmed at the effort and money that is being spent to get an unworkable copyright inw passed. Duplicating machines will only become more numerous and available in the future and trying to prove it copying of material will serve more to create disrespect for law tuan it wd to force people to buy books from publishers. If the publishers cannot produce books cheaper than they can be duplicated on these machines book pros ducers should improve their efficiency, not force people to buy their books by working to get a new copyright law passed Is m sdern times, not to be able to duplicate a paragraph or a figure for class tise without g ing through a hopelessly compileated release or remuneration #yatem would wife education and research in this country In closing. I very strongly urge you to amend or discard sections 107 and 10% of HR 23 and 8 22. THE ( V Monny Co. Dr Ray Alan WOODLIFY, 》 mtana State College, Bozeman, Mon, Dear Dr. Woobriry· Authors and editors are creative people; the manner in which you use knowledge and information to inform others is truly a creative i ama. It is our opinion that these creative talents deserve to be protected The copright law of 1900 has provided this protection, and as a consesjor.❤ Par contrli qtions when published have essentially not been used elsewhere The advent of copying machines has made it possible to reproduce virtual's everything in print Because of this and certain outmoded provisions of tie Coeur ght law of 1900, the United States House of Representatives at 1 Serate Jul. ary Committees are currently studying Copyright Revision Bals HR 22.1 and n. 22. Action on these identicni bills will be taken shortly. Of particular concern to us, and hopefully to you, are Sections 107 and 1, "Fair Use," and "School and Library Photocopying." It is our opinion that these sections of the proposed new law, as written, prom tect your creative efforts and our investment. These sections will restrict the activities of those who feel that anything in print may be copied and distributed as the copier sees fit-without the permission of, or compensation to, author and publisher alike. We are strongly convinced that your creativity and our invest ment must be protected. The new law will provide this protection and yet aliow wide information dissemination. Well organized efforts are presently attempting to amend Sections 107 and 10% Such amendments will not provide safeguards against photocopying excever st outlined above. I am writing to ask your assistance in protecting what I believe to be the correct position, one which truly serves everyone's best interests Attached is a list of House and Senate Judiciary Committee members. I 1' asking you to contact these Committee members as well as your own Congress persons. Your message need not be lengthy, but should emphasize these two points: 1. Much time and effort are expended in producing manuscripts for public. tion. Sections 107 and 108 represent the result of delicate compromises worked out by a number of groups, and if they are not tampered with, they will meet the "fair use" needs of educators and librarians. If broadened to allow uncontrolled and unrestricted use of copyrighted materials, they will discourage authors, writers, and editors. 2. It is essential that we encourage, sustain, and reward the competitive interplay of ideas. If broader exemptions were to be added to Sections 107 and 198, creative initiative would be stifled. The ultimate sufferer would be the intelle~ tual and imaginative life of the community. In short, we believe Sections 107 and 108 of HR. 2223 and S. 22 should be adopted without change! I would appreciate receiving a copy of your letter. If you wish additional information, I will be happy to supply it by return mail. With thanks and best wishes, I remain Cordially, JAMES B. FINN, Ph. D., Senior Vice President, Research and Development. We will now stand adjourned. [Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to recon vene at 10a.m., Thursday, May 15, 1975.] COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION THURSDAY, MAY 15, 1975 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, CIVIL LIBERTIES, AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m. in room 22:26, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Robert W. Kastenmeier [chairnvy of the subcommittee] presiding. -Present: Representatives Kastenmeier, Danielson, Drinan, PattiRailsback, and Wiggins. Also present: Herbert Fuchs and Bruce A. Lehman, counsels; and Totas E. Mooney, associate counsel. Mr. KASTEN METER. The committee will come to order for the purpse of continuing the hearings on H.R. 2223, on copyright law The Chair wishes to express gratitude to the gentleman from Califera, Mt. Danielson, who presided yesterday, while Mr. Wiggins and I were at the Rules Committee in connection with getting a bill out of Ce committee. Also, the Chair would like to say that it continues to be amazed at the public interest in this question, as demonstrated by the number altending the hearing. I am sorry that everybody cannot be seated. This morning, we are interested in the question of educational uses efer than public broadcasting. In this connection, we have divided t...s morning's time, more or less, between advocates of educational u let us call them educators for this simple purpose and the er half, by authors and publishers of materials used by educators I will also suggest that the House is in session; regretfully, we may interrupted for a brief period of time - 10 or 15 minutes-we may lave to recess for the purpose of making calls to the House for votes or otherwise. We apologize, but this is an unusual circumstance, and wrist that all present will bear with us. It's morning I would like to first greet as witnesses the following: Mr Sheldon Stembach, staff counsel, American Conned on Educa ten, anden man, Ad Hoc Comnattee on Copyright Law Revision: Mr Leo J. Rasand, professor of law, University of Minnesota; and Dr. Howard B. H tchens, executive diretor, Assonation for Educatonal Communications and Technology: Robert F Horan, executive retary, National Council of Teachers of Figl h; Mr Harry N. Roset id, counsel, Ad Hoc Committee on Copyright Law Revision -ad who testified, as I recall, extensively in hearings 10 years ago; and Mr. Bernard Freitag, Council Rok High School, New Town, Pa. He is accompanied by Dr. Harold Wigren, on behalf of the National Education Association-and Dr. Wigren is remembered for his testi mony 10 years ago, in more or less the same field. Gentlemen, you are all welcome. May I, therefore, ask Mr. Steinbach to proceed first. TESTIMONY OF SHELDON E. STEINBACH, STAFF COUNSEL, AMERI Mr. STEINBACH. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am Sheldon Elliot Steinbach, staff counsel and assistant director of gov. ernmental relations of the American Council on Education. I appear before you today, however, representing the Ad Hoc Committee of Education Organizations on Copyright Law Revision, a consortium covering a wide spectrum of 39 organizations within the educational community with interest in the revision of the copyright law. Most especially, we represent the interests of teachers, professors, schoo and college administrators, subject matter specialists, educational broadcasters, librarians, and indirectly, students themselves. A list of our members is attached to this statement. In addition, we support the testimony given by the library associations yesterday. These groups are also members of the ad hoc committee. Our testimony today will be presented by four individuals representing several organizations within the ad hoc committee. Althoug there is a fundamental ad hoc position, the interests of each constituent group varies, and as such, they will emphasize in their testimony today those matters of greatest concern to them. Furthermore, each group under the ad hoc umbrella has reserved the right to determine its own posture with regard to particular issues. [List of members follows:] AD HOC COMMITTEE ON COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION Agency for Instructional Television. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. American Association of School Administators. American Association of School Librarians. American Association of University Women. American Council on Education. American Educational Theatre Association, Inc. American Library Association. Associated Colleges of the Midwest. Association for Childhood Education International. Association for Computing Machinery. Association for Educational Comunications and Technology. Association of Research Libraries, Baltimore County Schools, Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Coubeil on Library Resources, International Reading Association. Joint Connell on Educational Telecommunications, Inc. Medical Library Association. Modern Language Association. Music Educators National Conference. Music Teachers National Association. National Art Education Association National Association of Educational Broadcasters. National Association of Elementary School Principals. National Association of Schools of Music. National Catholic Educational Association. National Catholic Welfare Conference. National Commission for Libraries and Information Science. National Contemporary Theatre Conference. National Council for the Social Studies. National Council of Teachers of English. National Education Association of the United States. National Public Radio. National School Boards Association. Pubile Broadcasting Service. Speech Communication Association. OBSERVERS American Association of University Professors. American Home Economies Association. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Association of American Law Schools. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Feral Communications Commission. National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Mr. STPINBACH. I would like to add that the ad hoc committee will not address itself today to the question of instructional broadcasting beca ise we have been assured that this matter will be considered at a inter date, at which time we will be given an opportunity to speak to It is my pleasure now to introduce Prof. Leo J. Ra-kind, professor of law, University of Minnesota, representing the Association of Aberian Law Schools, the American Association of University Profor, and the American Council on Education the Jont CopyComittee for those three organizations, The prepared statement of Leo J. Raskind follows:] Statement of Leo J. Raskind, Made of Behalf of the Association of AMERICAN LAW N HOOLS, AMERICAN AssocTATON OF University PROFESSORS, AND THE AMERICAN COUNCH ON EDUCATION Mr. Charman and members of the subcommittee, I am Leo J. Raskind, profour of law at the University of Minnesota. I am chairman of the Special Comtee -ħ Copyright Law of the Association of American Law Schools, I appeir say on behalf of the Association of American Law Schools, the American prostate of University. Professors, and the American Council on Education. Dese three organizations. We account for some 6.000 law teachers and * other university professors The American Council on Edlication is fact of national and regional education organizations and nearly 1,400 sof lagbar edit, alion gly n ge that the doctrine of fair use be preserved and given formal kot, ka by Catigress, both by exprem statutory provision and by appropriate laar in the final Comu ittie report. Our position in grounded on the Constitutional directive to Congress contained jp ↑ Meet; 1, M-Clanse K which provides tigrein mlali have P wer to prom, te the Progress of Science and useful Anany newsaring for limited lines to Authors and inventors this exclusive it aut var respective Wort? tigs and Discoveries De ba`er education communi'y is the principal institution in our society **a*ard with, the task of transmitting and advancing kuw.olar. It is our excern 1 m barging this basic function of teaching and research that moves us to r an effective statutory expression of the doctrine of fair use In making this propomal, I wish to elupuas te that we do hot meek to retu sve jeforted material from the ambit of the Copyrig it statute We are Leither allerne but hostile to the basic premise that legitimate rights in Intellectual property merit protection and compensation Indeed, we accept this premise as |