The most effective and least costly distribution-dissemination system may we'w pe out both producers and AV services as we know them today.

BIT, whatever the substitute or development, there will still need to be creative, entreprenueurial development of effective materials.

W.'hout reward there will be no such development, whether "commercial types" mus ator types" are involved. Theft denies reward.

HE WHO COMMENTS LAST

GOLDEN EGG PRODUCTION: THE GOOSE CRIFS "FOUL"

(By Robert Churchill 1)

Publisher'a Comment.-The development in recent years of high-speed, logh efficiency duplication equipment in almost every mode unquesti sabay poses problems for producers. But I would like to suggest that it is a challenge for consumers as well, on another level. What can be cofled? Almost anything in print, on film, tape or records. What may be expued? Almost nothing that is protected by copyright, because the fight to make copies belongs to the author or the producer. Seems clear eigh, doesn't it?

Bat with the kids' real best interests at heart, doesn't the impoverIshed educator have the right to steal a loaf of media bread to feed his ka gry horde? If you are tempted by this reasoning, what about another question do the members of this same horde also have the right to satisfy their needs by acquiring without benefit of purchase procedures a book, a beer, a pack of cigarettes, a salami?

Teenage pulferage is even more rampant than VD. I wonder whether for teachers to steal the works and rights of others by duplication withcat authorization is any more or less exemplary than teacher fornication in the cafeteria?

Today s mojuasticated duplicating empacity can be duplicitous. Let's Got be duped ourselves into breaking the law, especially when thousands of kids are observing us,

I am a goose with tears in my eyes. People laugh at me in the street. Children at a cat their tongues. A big grown up goose. Crying!

itw almost these eges tl it à lay. Our eggs., Weil, maybe golden is too strong a word but with out of pocket production costs averaging about $20,000 a fim, hvatim euting then for breakfast.

Wats at this crying nonsense? It's about videotape duplication. It's about a very real concern of producer distributors that they will be forced out of buttons If educators duplicate 16mm flims without authorization.

I arti le in't gong to belibor the Pie, dity of videotape dup Eeation Start the copyright law or even the cflics of a little benign larceny (after all, its for the benefit of the children fint it'1⁄2 Rafler lets exatose the ecois of egg pit «duction and why there soon nay be no more fat

I wd have to speña, of course, from the experience of our own stall com. 118 1 but I beve that it is ressonably representative It is true that we produce a fi'n, for 820 000 and well prints for $200 Alont 65 of that $200, &tse ie fake a few』*yer!", trow fortirt ca's, da*ད་པ་ཤོར་རྩདྨ in li jite in our

*** p****, and overbend The 3', pays off the pr«da en cost ⠀»» production cost would be recouped with the wie of 25 prin

it is bae a great little enterprise, Vor] RIV

to make a pr at Ah, but it will take us two mud a Luf to three years te we have mid 285 prints Yon thought that this was big bramattist

in is that 16mm prints are so expusive that they can a fratin of their needs Why then coldt, U. Videotape o plicak the problem of providing all those extra cop es that aclmu

If a few is tud to the pride or for Veralt to take copies

se ti at the producer can at ¦ make a living and the sol.

bert Charchill is President of Charchill Films, 662 N. R.Sertion Bird LA Calf

have as many copies of a film as they need. Personally, I profoundly boo that this will happen. Today films are too rare, too hard for the teacher to ger Availability will cause a great increase in use, understanding of the med and consequent further demand. Eventually I suspect that the producer w benefit as more funds are channeled into a teaching medium that has £ia. come alive.

Let's leave the heady vision of tomorrow's cornucopia long enough to be » that the last paragraph begins with an if. If on the other hand, the proda films are duplicated without compensation, soon there will be no fins i goose is dead.

It works this way. A producer counts on a number of purchasers who buy tot just one print, but from two to ten or more. Also, after a few years a users will replace a print that has worn out. If he loses these sales, the j ducer is in trouble.

An even greater potential hazard comes from the tape-happy media d rectit who doesn't buy even the first print. A person from our company saw this las pen in the office of an unselfconscious media director in Northern Calf ma last spring. The director, who had on his desk a number of audio tapes sett in for a demonstration project from various producers, was calling across I partition to an assistant, conferring on the number of tapes of each title ter thought they should run off on their high speed duplicator. These were Di 16mm films, but they might have been.

An ingenious way to save the taxpayer's money, by George! Next yea perhaps they can set up a plant and print all their own textbooks facsimile.

Even if this last imaginative kind of larceny doesn't become the rage film duplication, the goose will succumb if there is loss of duplicate print orders and replacement sales, Conservatively these will account for 25% of a em pany's sales. And there isn't a film producer in the country, whether it's FBF or little old us, who wouldn't be out of business before you could say “rider tape-duplication” if its gross income dropped by 25%.

No duplication without compensation! Don't kill poor old granny goose" Tia's the word. Pass it on.

AUDIOVISUAL MANAGEMENT

"UNAUTHORIZED COPYING:" A BUBBLING ISSUE

Historically, most schoolmen thought it acceptable to make a single copy of a commercially produced educational program or of printed materials. Much happened in the past year to dispel that notion. First, a US. court of claims commissioner awarded damages to a Baltimore publisher when a government-related medical library made photocopies of a number of articles from the publisher's journals. Next, the Educational Materials Producers Council, a group of companies that publish programs in various A V formats, formed a copyright committee to push for revisions in existing copyright laws-revisions which Congress seems closer to passing than at any time in the past five years Finally, news arrived that Utali's Granite School District had reached a unique licensing agreement on film duplication with Encyclopaedia Britannica Educational Corp.

In order to clarify the new copyright issues, Vation's Schoola con ducted the following exclusive interview with Ivan Bender, general cott, el of Psych piedia Brit danca Educational Corp and a member of FMPC% Copyright Committee.—Philip Leicis, president, Instruefronal Dynamics, Inc., Chicago,

Mr. Bowder we hear a lot these days about so-called "ynnythorised 2014 of dmx, Almatrips, videotapes, carretter and other audiossunt programa you give us an example of a school distret with an “authorized" erpvina pe Yes The Granite School Di triet, in suburban Salt Lake City has recrested software prodners to grant licenses to reproduce 16′′ m fime in a vite t formist. The distri + Fax 156 video cassette p'avers and 21 player rund Fivoli predia Britanien Fineational Corp has proposed an experimental one Vegrevnteret the gitattrig keb, 15 urder which the district can ecry in me fasi en ny FRIC films they own or have legsdf cape pas que ire duri term of the contract. The offer is based on a lensing fee of $76 per unt agent or a total of $500 for the year.

This type of proposal lets Granite account only for the number of machines in use rather than keep track of student population, number of copies made, or other factors that could mean a lot of bookkeeping for schools. In essence, the Granite contract was negotiated on only two factors;

1) approximate number of films in use, and 2) units of equipment. If this arrangement proves successful, it will no doubt lead to similar license,

Is this kind of licensing likely to become a trend? Do you visualize similar agreements incolting other kinds of media, such as audio cassettes or flmstrips The logic of the plan could extend to other kinds of media provided that a workabse formula could be arranged. If the Granite arrangement proves succesful, I'd certainly say that s a distinct possibility.

What has prompted producers of audiovisual programs for education to be Concerned over unauthorized duplicating nore↑

Princi,any, the improvement of copying hardware. Several years ago, photoe, Ving reached a point of perfection; but only in the past year or so have da ucation techniques been refined for such equipment as the videotape player reorder

In addition, the so-called "educational exemption” theory a widespread fecung in the educational community that certain types of copying for classroom use are permissible as long as this copying is not on a for profit basis – has been g wing The copyright law does not provide for such an "educational exemption," and I m sure you can see what the problems of such an exemption might be, tan you spell out the problema*

1 m principally concerned about widespread copying, even if it's on a sporadic of ocasional basis. Producers arent opposed to having their materials copied, Lu; they cannot accept the notion that their materials should be copied in a fashion which would excred the doctrine of "fair use" unless they receive just and fair eur petisation,

For producers of audi›visual materials this is a very crucial problem. The expying of even a few films by a school district could mean a severe economie loss to them because unlike texts, which are generally bought for each student in a class, A. V programs usually serve a number of students at any one time. Using numbers, a textbook may sell from 10,000 to 100,000 copies, while an A V þræram's sales may not even reach 1,000

Congress in at sork on a meie, reissed copyright law. How does the existing law define' fair use,” and what will the new law say about st!

Present copyright laws date back to 1909 The "fair use" doctrine has resulted frota judicial interpretations over the years Basicnlly, it allows limited copy1. g of aunil portions of a work without seeking prior permission and without jatient of a fee. For the first time, however, the proposed revision will make 'fair use' a part of the law itself_A_recent House committee report stated "Where the unauthorized copying displaces what realisticnlly night have been asa e no matter how minor the amount of money involved, the interests of the efiright owner need protection ・ Nome factors the user must con-ider: 1) the Purpose and character of the use; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work 3) the Sit of material being copied as related to the work as a whole, and 4) the efc t of the copying upon the potential market for the copyrighted work

From there quidelines, it seems the proposed late still be asking schools them selves to make decimona as to what constituten "fair use" Can you provide more aperite rules of thumb P

birst jet tue say that it's easier to disʻinguish “fair use” in printed misterials "an in audiovisual ninteria's Take a motion picture f ́m for ex n p'e. If you Time (at ly a quantitative test to determine `f Ir tim," You may well be 1, 3 mit 11 fin that is legally unacceptable bec itse of the very nat are of the expyrighted work Copying one minute out of a film that runs för 20 min.n'es fav rot seeth to le a Virption, but that one minute may be the most expetive and appetant ja** of toe fou especially if it de nets an event t སློང་སྙWAkས་ཟླར།ཙིuཡཱ -iotuསཱ་tl!,,t toplot graph or relates to special kinds of plot- gra; ha

In the case of firstripm however it's my own feeling that carving one op two franges ont of a 50 or 60 frame filmstrip may mare maly be inter !མ། 'fair t This is not a uniform guiderne, theng, and the user སྙན་a མའོ་ ma e tu co6nder what these frames Pet zemeit in fer f the W The W.. fingraryona in entire predeam e et la defied 14That gat ༄【! swi』 at{ ༣ gངཏོ་ལྟo fuo tsele tt teelale !eexpe* i『 t #!emen [r•ཧཱུཾ་ ཌི Ing litrary photos of ving of articles within periodicals? If there's any d ́uit Den off. lais mliotiid cvitetact the Arm.

Does it matter whether districts make single or multiple copies?

Not really. Even single copying of certain kinds of material may violate the "fair use" concept. And multiple copying may subject the violator to a greater amount of damages.

We understand that the Education Materials Producers Council has formed a copyright committee to seek changes in the copyright law. What other orgenizations are active in this area?

The National Education Association has an ad hoc committee on copregt that seeks a limited educational exemption for the doctrine of "fair use." B14cally, NEA would allow greater latitude in classroom copying than is presently permissible.

Another group, the American Library Association, wants libraries to br freer rights to copy single articles for research purposes and to have the right to supply a copy of an entire work if the library has determined that offrighted work cannot be obtained from trade sources,

Why are we struggling so hard with the copyright laws when nobody thought about them much for 50 years or 80?

For the first few decades of this century, we weren't faced with the corning technology that now exists. We now recognize that there are social values to be considered on both sides of the issue. The new copyright law will ai w us to reach compromises so that there will be accessibility to educational mate rials at the same time that the commercial procedures of these materials are justly compensated for their creative efforts.

May I add that the new law envisions establishment of a commission na technological developments that will assess the effects technical developezet's will have on the copyright laws. The job of this commission will be to point out and inadequacies in the new laws to the President and to Congress,

Regardless of what happens to the revised copyright legislation, can we ar sume that educational materials producers will seek new arrangements with schools? If 80, what are some alternative plana!

I think we can assume that the new technology will eventually result in suma modification of present marketing procedures. We will see more frequent banker licenses like the Granite arrangement. Or there may be a modification in pr♥ structures that will allow a built-in royalty to the copyright proprietor when he sells materials with the right to copy without permission.

So-called compulsory licensing agreements, such as that practiced by ASCAP (music publishers), might be possible; but under present antitrust laws A would be very difficult to apply to any other industry. The ASCAP arrange ment operates under a special government ruling which permits its existet e Is it possible that educational program producers could come up with a double price structure-one price for normal use, and a higher price for unlimited copung privileges?

This might well happen, although I think its premature. Quite naturs"r It will be up to individual companies to determine the kind of marketing techniques that are most suitable.

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD J. MEELL, CHAIRMAN, EDUCATIONAL MEDIA PRODUCERS COUNCIL

Mr. MEFIL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My name is Edward J. Meell, chairman of the Educational Moda Producers Council of the National Audio-Visual Association. With ne is the copyright chairman of that council.

I would like, before I get into my formal summary of our statement, to stress the first word in the title of our organization Educateral Media Producers Council. The 95 members of that organization pr duce almost exclusively for the educational market.

We are not interested in the general consumer market, or the enteri taiment market. We are produc.1g for elementary, secondary, cola, and university schools,

I would like to stress that 90 percent of our organization's members gross less than 85 million a year as a revenue under which they operate. Tit has to cover all sorts of things from marketing to development.

On behalf of my organization, I would like to say we support H.R. 2.3 as it has been introduced, especially section 107, which writes into tutory law the main principles of fair use as that doctrine has been terpreted by the courts over the years. We would hope that fair use hot become free use.

We feel the language, especially in 107, represents an equitable compor use between the creators and users of copyrighted educational materal, a compromise that has been painstakingly negotiated over the several years. The technology which permits the easy duplication of a lovial materials has been introduced only very recently-I ara tilking here of motion pictures, sound filmstrips, and audio tires after hearings that your committee held in the sixties. It is a very significant development for our industry, one which has already L a great impact on the educational media industry, which merits fi cons.deration by your committee,

As a point of fact, our industry is very pleased with the progress in tology. It is not our intent to stop that march of progress of techgy. It promises to make ideas and information niore accessible to rs, teachers, and learners. These developments promise also to expand the role and contribution of educational media producers to the ecational process, which we consider an integral part.

In order to naintan mereasing incentives for the creation and pro4. ton of quality materials, we must not diminsh the statutory proeton for intellectual products to which any author, creator, or artist isted. We are therefore opposed to any amendment which would ise for an edu ational exemption. We solely distribute, as I mentorted, to the educational market, not to the consumer or the enterrament field.

An anerent which increases the amount of duplication permitte i poder für use could significantly decrease potential sales, and tofore the product on of instructional materials, Companies in this dmarket are faced with two major factors.

First: Te vast maority of anhovi nal materials are not used in a to one situation. T: ey are used with large and small groups. There frete number of cop.es made is quite limited one or two cop es of a

meter film a may serve an entire school system of moderate size. Age copy of a filmstrip or a sound recording wil serve an entire

cords A typical and ovisual product will enstomarily sell relafew copos over a period of 5 to 10 years, Ties is in comparson te textbooks or to journals wi, hi may sell thousan. Is of copies. SA fees, la ammeter fi mas may sell only 300 copies over 3 years. If we lose decor to of those copies in unant sorized duplicit on, we are immex®skirt.

Ian, the res; fare of in'tial inve trent in row at 5, develo puent, for al, and product on work, w1⁄4, chen to as much for one cony as for is spread over the sale of a relatively limited runder of coj tes, ()!ལྟར་ན Forget alant al investi, ent reposed for the ferano florent table Loperating expo, es for the period of tire

"

Ie comber, at on of these factors limited mark it, sma'l volume སྙན་།ས༣ is over an extor-led per od Theatis a schecchio feru deting of the fir vertter are 2'1 lana ge bevord repsa tre qalay nd diversity