facturing clause in the laws of other countries would severely damage our international trade in books. Fortunately the manufacturing clause cannot be applied against American authors in any of the 50 countries which are now members of the Universal Copyright Convention, but there are still important book importing countries which are not yet members of the Universal Copyright Convention. As a book exporting country it is always in our economic as well as political interest to support the freest possible international exchange of scientific, educational, and cultural materials.

(4) American authors would be free to have their works published or printed abroad without sacrificing their copyright protection in a number of special circumstances. As will be demonstrated later, American authors would not very often wish to have their books printed or published abroad because it is ordinarily much simpler and more advantageous to have the work done in their own country. This is the universal situation despite the fact that authors in other countries are not restricted by a manufacturing requirement. But there are circumstances in which it would be a considerable convenience to deal with a local publisher abroad, as in the case of the increasing number of American scholars who may be temporarily stationed abroad on Fulbright fellowships and similar arrangements. There are also the rare cases in which no American publisher is interested in an author's book but a foreign publisher may be.

(5) It would permit the selection of American authors as contributors to important scientific, technical, and professional works published by foreign publishing firms or international agencies. At the present time outstanding American scientists and other professional people are usually excluded from consideration when an author for a book on their specialty is being sought by a foreign publisher or an international agency having its headquarters outside the United States. No matter how outstanding the American expert may be, he will be excluded from consideration because the manufacturing clause provision would result in losing copyright of the book in the United States if it were manufactured abroad. This is a result which not only damages the prospective author but hinders the progress of science and scholarship and the international intellectual standing of the United States.

(6) Foreign authors domiciled in the United States, even temporarily, would not lose their copyright protection in this country if their works in English were printed abroad because of being published by the author's regular publisher. The protection the Universal Copyright Convention and our law give to the works of authors who are citizens of Universal Copyright Convention countries does not apply if the foreign authors are domiciled in the United States at the time their foreign-manufactured book is imported.

(7) It would reduce the present special frictions with Canada over the manufacturing clause. Canada has a special relationship to the United States in the field of book publishing because of its nearness and its use of the English language. It is by far our largest export market for books. Canadian publishers feel particularly aggrieved because books by Canadian authors are very frequently published in the United States and these books exported to Canada without sacrifice of copyright. However American authors cannot be first published in Canada without losing their copyright protection in this country. The Canadian publishers are not so much interested in books by a single American author, but rather in being free to seek American contributors to joint works which cannot now be done without throwing the whole book into the public domain in the United States. It would be possible, under the terms of the Universal Copyright Convention, which outlaws any manufacturing clause for foreign authors, for Canada to retaliate by adopting such a clause with respect to her own authors, as we now do, and thus effectively discourage the first publication of Canadian authors in this country.

(8) It would eliminate what the authors of the Copyright Office study of the manufacturing clause, dated February 1963, have called "an intricate tangle of general requirements, exceptions, special procedures for proof of compliance, special provisions for ‘ad interim' copyright, and import prohibitions and exceptions. These provisions abound in abstruse and ambiguous terms, making enforcement extremely difficult." These requirements place a heavy and expensive administrative burden on the Copyright Office and the Customs Service, as well as on publishers and importers of books. They would all be neatly excised by complete repeal of the manufacturing clause.

ECONOMICS OF THE MANUFACTURING CLAUSE

The only argument ever advanced for retaining what remains of the manufacturing clause is based on its supposed economic effects on the U.S. bookmanufacturing industry. Fears are expressed that if the clause is repealed books will be manufactured abroad and imported into this country because of lower wages in foreign countries. This same argument was presented in the 1954 congressional hearings on the Universal Copyright Convention with respect to removing the manufacturing requirement on books in English by foreign authors. Severe economic damage to our printing industry was predicted if works by British authors could be imported and did not have to be remanufactured in the United States to get U.S. copyright protection. This prediction proved to be utterly unfounded. Works by British authors continue to be remanufactured in this country when the prospective sale makes a U.S. edition economic, and there has been no vast switch to the importing of British editions. This is conclusively demonstrated in table 1 below which compares the importation of foreign editions of general books with the domestic remanufacture of works by British and other foreign authors before and after the effective date of the U.S. (1955) and the British accession to the Universal Copyright Convention (1957). General books were selected as a test case and special questionnaires were sent out to gather the information, because in no other category of books was the remanufacture of copyrighted English-language editions of any significance in the early 1950's. The table also gives for comparative purposes the number of comparable titles by American authors and the average size of editions for the years 1953, 1958, and 1964.

As the table shows, the number of British and other editions imported did increase, but so did the number of foreign titles remanufactured here and the number of titles by American authors. The percentage of total copies represented by imported editions increased from 1.8 of the total in the sample in 1953 to 4.8 in 1964. The increase over 1953 of about 11⁄2 million copies of imported books by 1964 was matched by about the same increase in the number of copies of foreign works remanufactured in this country. If the predictions of the opponents of the Universal Copyright Convention had been borne out, the number of foreign titles remanufactured in the United States should have decreased drastically.

The figures on the average size of the importations and of the domestically manufactured editions illustrate the real reason why importation took place in some cases and domestic manufacture in others, and this had little or nothing to do with the manufacturing clause. As I pointed out in my 1954 analysis, discussing the 1953 figures:

"The books in English by foreign authors manufactured in the United States were produced in editions averaging 7,400 copies. This is an average size of edition which is well above the figure at which it is more economical to manufacture an American edition rather than to try to import. The imported editions, it will be noted, averaged only about 1,500 copies American publishers

have found that on editions of about 2,500 copies or more it is more practical to print and bind books in this country. This is done even where copyright is not involved at all as in the case of the Bible and the classics * * *. Thus it can be stated with virtual certainty that of the 2 percent or so of annual American book production which consists of the works of foreign authors in the English language now manufactured here only a very small part could conceivably be supplied by imports if these works are exempted from the requirement of U.S. manufacture to secure full U.S. copyright."

I have quoted from my testimony and referred to the figures for 1953, which are the same 1953 figures which appear in table 1. What had happened by 1958 and 1964? The average size of the importations of British editions had increased somewhat by 1964 to about 1,900 copies, but so had the size of the average edition of British works remanufactured in this country. The ratio of edition sizes remained about the same as it had in 1953, with the American remanufactured editions being four to five times as large as the imports. As it had been in 1953, it continued to be more economic to remanufacture in the United States titles with a sizable potential sale and to import the titles with a small sale.

Thus, as predicted, it was not the existence of the manufacturing clause which was responsible for the remanufacture of 395 British titles in the United States

CHART 1

COMPARATIVE VOLUME OF TRADE BOOKS IN ENGLISH, IMPORTED & MANUFACTURED IN THE U.S. IN 1953, 1958 AND 1964

in 1953, but the fact that it was more economic to produce American editions where the edition size averaged 7,400 copies. After the UCC had for all practical effect wiped out the manufacturing requirement on works by foreign authors in English, there were 535 editions remanufactured in the United States in an average edition size of 8,500 copies.

I have dwelt at some length on this recent historic test because it has a direct bearing on the question now before us-the potential economic effects on the U.S. printing industry of the repeal of the manufacturing clause. American book publishers, who must make the economic decisions and risk their capital, knew from practical experience that the removal of the manufacturing require

ment for the books of foreign authors, as required by the UCC, would not result in any significant shift to the importation of foreign editions in English from the remanufacture of such editions here, and that the economic effect on the book manufacturing industry in this country would be negligible. All that I did, as the industry economist, was to try to demonstrate the correctness of this business judgment by means of statistics and economic analysis.

The Book Manufacturers Institute, representing the specialized book-manufacturing firms of the country, went along with the judgment of the publishers and in the end supported U.S. accession to the UCC in 1954. Witnesses for the printing trades unions continued their opposition, but the Congress decided that they had not made a convincing case. The U.S. book-manufacturing industry has never had a period of more rapid growth than since the British accession to the Universal Copyright Convention became effective in 1957. The U.S. Census of Manufactures shows the following increases in production workers and value added by manufacture in the specialized book-printing industry for the period from 1958 to 1963, compared to manufacturing as a whole:

The book publishing industry is now convinced that what remains of the manufacturing clause has no real protective function for the book manufacturing industry in this country, much less for the much larger collection of industries which make up printing and publishing in general. We believe that everyone would benefit by the complete removal of the clause, and that this can be demonstrated in a number of ways.

THE EXAMPLE OF GREAT BRITAIN

We can, for example, look at the experience of other countries. No other nation has a manufacturing clause and foreign authors can go anywhere to be published and their publishers can have books manufactured throughout the world. Despite this complete freedom we find universally that foreign authors have their works published in their own country in practically all cases and foreign publishers have all but a minute portion of their printing done at home. Great Britain provides a good concrete example. Practically no resident British authors are first published elsewhere. British publishers are free to go any where in the world for their printing and since they export over 40 percent of their book production they have more than the usual knowledge of opportunities and incentives to print abroad if there were advantages in doing so. They can go to nearby European countries with lower wage rates, or as far as India, Hong Kong, or Japan. What actually happens? Only a very small amount of printing is done in other countries for British publishers, and what is done is frequently not because it is cheaper but because printers on the continent may occasionally be able to give faster delivery or a better quality of work in some specialized field. The total value of British book imports in 1963 was $23 million as compared with $252 million in British domestic production at publishers' prices.

This import figure includes all kinds of imports and the vast majority consists not of books sent abroad for manufacture by British publishers but of the