« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
. a variety of attacks on copyright. Some of these we discussed yesterday: 1. "xxx**)", "restraint of information" and "mere privilege claims. As to ther is.
Ad Ben Imkermen contend that uncompensated educational copying beyond the lines of fair use must be legislated because it allegedly promotes the
** of sience and art. This misses the very point of the Constitution's RO</Pints claus, which intended that authors be granted "valuable, enfonruble 1.ts to encourage them to produce works of lasting value. Grunting rights,
destrovine them. was how the constitution intend to promote the progre *ef Nrip and art ('omjmtating authors for use of their work, not depraling 1... of rruuterutiota. was the method chosen by the Constitution. Authors Wine works are used in schools make a positive contribution to the educational Burk, and for repromluction beyond fair use, they are entitled to anaetation,
• y: ar Remart buted, the educational group are mistanın in their alument tal a for profit' unitation is applicable to educational copils under the Errent law **
A lar ( omtaltteen kesmen have argued that any copyright limitation on 1% fl. trd educational (upink beyond fair un restruilis "irtdow" to read la for the first An.endment 'lns utterly fallacious arrument was made by the lig in the 1.1.1ms & Wiikins (ase, and was completely ignored by majority wid honlarity ofnan, 'Ile Fint Amendment was fasuroud to mure untetiend Wrn that of ideas (nullivan v. 1. Times) and it is aromatic that at
u* Brauf Vyright dem not present anyone from di un in, or r ating his des k t , Rinden louri, The Supreme (ourt luan never interpreted the * Erre to read under the birst Amendmurtat to means that risiated works tre at the provided free of harke: anel it bas frueniat einjalanizu that there is
***.11.t mren pubikarion for profit and the First Amenduetat. I nder tlae All t1fy of fresun to read". trudern and ubranat shouid work without lu, virs 100.d crane cbarking tuition and the Arrox Corporation should be
la few when it tdi bine reproduc ten!lonal materials Ord. ' n las fix time on the (up a rts of the Ad H. (ointuitos 1* r 11 triptioti, bnt the Authork Lake of its other pron istumAn Wrii. It w at hit.lv dnngerts to add an "inpwort** Temption with rest to com** , tlak nantial community is not entitled to further additions to an luvad pomorrad trint tuto Pretnution.
119:11 18-30 YY AILS Te Revloba Bill would establish a single term of pyrirht for nr* works, hasing for the authors life aid 30 years after his or her death 'This is the ng stickat term rtupioyed by most other (ountries. Existing a naxhts woud
* Inte utxer te present systein: a first terin of *** years which an riwvel for a tad terin, that will l»* enlarnin.1 to 47 » rs (Sey*
4 ) 1. la portar bearinks the Author Laugur mirusiy mumain the parents 3 urge your N'aiuttnittee to retain them and to rrfect drmaids hr Ad line ! ..!'r #luft.et to turn back to the prosptat two ferm kisten and prala
lain terin eferter or different dura!). Tar (omtuitiv kort ** Hate We overwhelming sport for a life pl n rth, and this was tad fer, und true whalebar analyıd in the Report.
author's death, as it would for all unpublished (as well as published) fuarla books, letters and other works, Authors like Ernest Hemingway would be * be able to provide for their families by leaving unpublished novels to be in years after their death.
THE NEED FOR MORE ADEQUATE PROTECTION With an increasing lifespan, authors ontlive their copyrights. Many are me to provide for their immediate families since their renewal copy richats expn =* after their death. Their wives, husbands and children are denied any shark the income their works continue to produce for others-cornpensation et families would have under a life-plus-50 term.
Widows of illustrious American authors have outlived their husbands by tent' derndes. In their advancing years, the only income which permits some of the widow, to live in dignity and a semblance of comfort are the totalties in works written by their husbands. This income is taken from them when the ** newal copyright expires. Under life-plus-10 they would continue to ferile** desperately needed income. Ours is the only western country which denies ar authors or their surviving families this income. All the others have a cufTTE term of lire plus 50 (or more) years,
It should be remeinbered that life-plus-50 years benefits only those autbor crented books, plays and music of sufficient value to surrire. And I should stress that it is authors, and the families of deceased authors, who will beneft in longer term. They would receive at least 500s, and often all, of the con income from their books, poetry or plays during the extended period of poudre tien- ause of the reversion provision, and the nature of publishing antara mente most professjonal authors make. Life-plus-10 years would not pour.de windfalls for book publisberx, and is not a matter of grare concern to tbema
LIIT-PLI'S 50 IS JUSTDIED BY THE ECOxovic LEGAL REALITIES OF THE COPYRINT
As we stressed in our testimone yesterday, the instrument chosen by the to titution to serve the public interest-to secure literary and scientine Works lasting value is an independent, entrepreneurial, proferty rights system 1 ing and publishing. The freelance author must earn his living from income per duced by the book, plars, articles, poems, etc. he creates. He must look for *. InKme to the payments made for their various use so long as he retains
Whether or not copyright is **property" (and it is), the author is requin unrrire as a property owner. He is not paid an annual salary. He writes at 18 Own risk Sevne of the grentest literary, dramatie and musical works antribuint to our wirty and posterity would not, eren under life-plus , provide their 3% thor with adegunie (umumnation for the value of their contributions to su 1'! But the authors are entitled to at least that morb for themselves and their fatilies in this funertion, it should be strowed that an author's omwel, 1 can ists of an acrumula!l«1 of royalties, often mall, for uw of hi. ** **** rrid of many years. The Us are finde by reprint publishers, tad anthologists, preriodicals and others, as well as he his initial poblisher !
richt in list, all of the other Users are free to prop in te fren mih* or other works without paying ang pinathn to him or b. fam.
Often an auther words do not comenre te par income for hit until 19 ater they are pullished, when he has finally won n ktıltion Often & **
ire, entrepreneurs who are entitled to hold property rights not merely for
years, but for 10 or 1) generations.
THE PUBLIC INTLBEST
Aife pins 50 term denot damage the public interest. Opponents argue that it 3 .d wharpiy curtail availability of works, and that it increases prices too much. letler arruinent has substance. B righ: do not diminish the availability of books, plays, music etc. Inderd, 1s 'he Cauffre remort noted, the loss of copyright is often likely to bave tlaat
fart. Artuaily availamily of copyrighted works has increased in rurat years. Motuarket and quality" paperbacks offer a myriad of titles. (niversity Micro
* and lar orkanizations now oll orders, on demand, for countless books flat buferly were out of print; under licenses from authors and publisher. We affaeb the point when a few os righted boks will be out of print. And there
Par. nina) provide entire bak is 11ty of countless Journals and other publi. rastis on mitrofilm and microfiche. These techniques are also used in reaning, to keep technical, scientific and other books available.
It with Werp protected for life.plus 30 years rather than 50 years, their cost ttle pitie id not increase wubstantially, if at all. As the ('ommittee report stare 'Ilur pullie frequentis pays the same price for
in us it dos for eapyrighted work, and the only result (of copyright ter. tate after year) is a commerrial windfall for certain for at the au.
hot sex tee." The price of a terback book is not reduced, for example, when the author Fright expires, But the share of the income it procu*, prerious
I to the author or his family, can now be p*keted by the publisher or other
Mwiter, this contargument should be put in true peretive. Cops right myfs-nents do not proroup that when a work goes out of right, a publisher
print it must llit at a le ***r profit, or at a prop fixed to a tre that the
*ill table to buy it more cheaply than cops righted works, or that broad**inar theatres de ruired to charge the public les for fwrformance of * * *hopyrights have prir: or that arton, teachers or musicians work al Bert anlary when prforunk or teaching works which have fallen into the B.':«d main-- to reduce the cost to the public.
p#THAMINATION OF (OPYRIGHT STATIN
thany reass, puricht state is not easy to determine under the porment #: #stra. It is sufrier to determine under life plus Melanie domus
j e in our pretioun tretino) and lease to refer to it. A your camn **rerfart nord the system of life plus*) Frars has Wurked 11 in nii her
ornire and on the whole it would apixar to b e computation of fupriklat) fpe *. pt ard PR int *
mony and undoubtedly will be described to you by the Copyright 0re 11 of these benefit Users.
For the reasons discussed above, the Authors League respectfully up *p* the adoption of a life-plus-50 copyright term is completely consistent w;"! letter and spirit of the Constitution's copyright clause. The ini, mest ir *:* and indispensable contribution to the public interest-i.e. securing the potem tion of works of lasting value is made by the author. t'ntil he creates his tad play, music or poem, no one can disseminate it, exploit it, teach it, or sys'* calls copy itWithout paying him. The Constitution intended that be bale * mable enforceable rights" to encourage him to serve this public interest 3* permit him to be compensated for his talent and labor. The period of time I provided by life-plus-30 is a reasonable and necessary method of art! ** that ('onstitutional purpose. And until some author discovers the sprint , tality life and will be a limited term of protection, much more limited this the 100 or 200 or more years of protection possible under our printer: law-plus-30 years of protection.
TESTIMONY OF IRWIN KARP, COUNSEL, THE AUTHORS LEAGOI
Jr. Karp. Jr. Chairman, thank you very much.
My name is Irwin Karp; I am counsel for the Author Lare America which is a national society of professional writers and dramatists.
In my prepared statement, which I respectfully submit for the you ord, I mention brietly at the outset the types of works that our me." write. It covers the whole range of creativity.
In my testimony this morning. I ailelross the ecuational crer.!! " as it has been ofered to the House and Senate, and has been meer for the sound reasons in your previous report and in the Senate remit. I would alwo like to speak, in the very limited time avulable, tot: problem of the life-and-30).years terin of copyright, unle that is to be disuwned at some later date.
I think perhaps I should put something into the record at thi-! on that. It is a much-abu-ed concept, and as was pointed out winego eduntors were propounding their opposition to life and it at ipd. ing their opposition on grounds that have no basis in reality, or piti in drevor common sense,
Fint of all, Profes-or Raskind told ye we are talking abottle Shu'ar copying bor hand. That is not so. We are talking about all tion and what has been proposed to you in the light of a technoles al resolution that created, as I de ribed yesterday, and as Mr. M 5 :3 of the Special Library Indkintion named, a medium of one-at & k. reprinting or one-at-a-time publishing,
I put into the committee's hands, some semblance of what the te nolegy has acomplished, including an entire book that is riprodur] on demand by the Sermachine.
When we get to multiple copy, unless there is some prodigious pen® man out at the University of Minnesota law whool, I do not know 103 anne is going to upr by hand 40 or 30 copies of a short orr or $ Tmwm. The technology has also armed the priveational statement '. contry with various was to very cheaply coup Tar10118 Who! is triktion.
Your mommittee, in its report, and the Senate committee, 11 instit work - I am talhing about the work you did well-maid the 14-for an eduntional promption had not twin made. I nder the doutr.!e of
fair use as expounded very specifically in your report, guidelines were it up for what was and was not fair use.
Ir von examine the guidelines, and examine the proposed amendment, your guidelines are much morerplicit and useful than the amendment prod by the educators. If clarity is the objective, they have vertainly failed mi-erably. ('ertainly their amendment does not teach us houwbort a short story.or how short a poem, can be copied.
Teachers will be coming back to you in a short time, asking you to urite 11-to law, the lengths of particular works.
Want you then suggputed to us, and something we have sought to do in the interim, is to sit down with the educators and work out rudelines of fair ns. This is the only 11rful way of dealirig with this problem. Practically every example given to you to lav, from the preture of the frog, up or down, ju fair 11. And the people who give inu 1. pumple know it is fuir use. They know that we think it is fairie.
If went with them periodically, a4 vou propose, reviewing in the mittent of current condition of education, the current condition of
bulshing and writing. the problems of fair use, we could work out muidelines that would be helpful and direct and useful to everybody.
Il went down priocially, none of us would be frozen with fear that what we conceded or opponed as fair use tolay would be a dan
a prendent to plaque us forever. To other wordt, an ongoing review that would consume much less time than our colleagues who trtified before us and we now have con
nel on the proljem ofronpright revision rould be much more inful.
Toal-o propose that were copying process the bound of fair 11., * poften ther, and as our eduntor colleagues would like to have it la that trasonable clearance arrangements be worked out for the payment of proti sobile comp-t10n, That is a sugestion picked up by one of Hip witpens in the prepaling panel. I think it in one that is e lv work alle
The s'ternatives are not, as Profesor Ra-kind anid, either or the 1991 righted work without payment or not use it at all.
Ilore jenthird alternative. I hat is where it oppaile finir 11- to obtain **on and pay a ramonable fee for it, as I will point out, and not
their neitryniant. Mnr I also point out in elaboration of the point V Patton made it in the author's right, where the work in billig Iw on the limits of fnir us, to what his ronflation will be
Our educational brethren turn their backs on the open market, the free market, and ignore the play of economy forre. The Constitution write for non convright cause thint Arronding to the Supreme Court
to publish authorirani publikung on a profit motivateilas
prwterl, what artually has happened, when an author of a sort start or pwm or publisher grant a right to 11 it in an antolorry, t! at he grants a none ville right to I thint work that Mat appear n ar.thuolot . The prej neumoftiir prior. The commit ton in 1 ponerlof plain mutunlly prolup for that are very fram le. Sarnase ! . *), forums , wfrfums ļos por 11, mrt 11°* norr.
Let me promt ont thint there.meilun mulher, mother ani! ,514 de pitomed to malincotre when they write Apoth. W of the arm 1.1 por professional or not. 11:P 1 of their rutk in antholmen # alut nye of income to them. For powtant hort story writer
rtrstitied for, and any of our author minden har test.tiedl.