« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
publisher whose imprint would mean something around the world and who would get out review copies of the book and proper notifications, would probably sell 100,000 copies. I do not know how many Government publications you have ever seen reviewed in the New York Times or in the professional journals. They just do not get reviewed and the information does not get around.
Mr. MILLER. We have not seen many government publications reviewed in the New York Times. However, this committee issued a report which was prepared by a group of prominent scientists that was a big seller. How
many copies of the report did we have printed ? Mr. DADDARIO. You are talking about "Basic Research and National Goals." We have made a check on that. It was on the order of 9,000 copies.
Mr. BENJAMIN. This was the Superintendent of Documents.
Mr. MILLER. This was not advertised. It was not something we had to advertise or ask the New York Times to review. Scholars all over the country asked for it. The Italian Government asked to reprint it.
Mr. BENJAMIN. This is owing to the particular quality of this information. This is something they would come and get. But most of it they would not come and get.
Mr. MILLER. I think that scientists, educators, and people who would be interested in this publication, would come and get it. They would be very happy to get it. The Government is not in the business to make a profit on printing.
Mr. BENJAMIN. They would not come out and get it as much as the publisher could take it to them. A classic example is the Smyth report.
Mr. MILLER. If scientists, educators, and other people want this, they will come and get.
Mr. BENJAMIN. If they know about it.
Mr. MILLER. They will know about it. We are not a bit anxious to put the Government in the printing business and compete with you. I like your idea of subsidizing the little guy and bringing him up to the point where he can buy it. I am surprised that you do not start through the book publishers a foundation to subsidize these colleges.
Mr. BENJAMIN. That would be taking money out of one pocket and putting it in your sock.
Mr. MILLER. You are not, perhaps, too much interested in them. Some of the research institutes feel that the Government is encroaching on their business.
Mr. BENJAMIN. Sir, the industry make a very large contribution to higher education every year, including my own firm. We are making larger and larger contributions.
Mr. MILLER. I am quite conscious of what they do. I would suggest that your firm may follow a precedent established by one of the big areospace firms that now makes these commitments not in cash but in Government bonds so that the Government gets a chance to use the money. I commend it to you.
Mr. BENJAMIN. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Wiley. I think there is quite a difference between the publishing industry and the aerospace industry.
Mr. MILLER. The direction of my questions has been to see if I could get some thread of thought which would lead us in the direction of overcoming some of the problems which have been raised by various members of the committee.
Mr. DADDARIO. I think that the testimony here has been extremely helpful in bringing to the attention of the committee that the private publishers do in fact have not only a stake in this, but a knowledge of how this information and transfer ought to take place. This has been developed over a long period of time and it is of extreme value to the committee as we try to put together the information necessary upon which to make final judgments. We will take into consideration what you have said, and if there is further information and advice we need, we will be in touch with you.
Are there any further questions? If not, I thank you both. Thank you, gentlemen. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO MR. CURTIS G. BENJAMIN AND MR. W. BRADFORD WILEY BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
Question 1. If the Bureau of Standards contracts with a commercial publishing organization to print and disseminate standard reference data, would the publishing organization expect to be allowed to copyright the data? Would it still undertake the contract if it were not allowed to copyright the material?
Answer 1. The only basis on which an American commercial publisher would be interested in publishing and distributing standard reference data would be under copyright.
Question 2. Dr. Hollomon testified that the duplication and sale of standard reference data by a commercial organization is permissible provided that the commercial organization does not use the "symbol or mark” on the publication. Under such circumstances, would a commercial organization duplicate and sell the material?
Answer 2. This question is covered by the reply to Question 1.
Question 3. On page 2 of your statement you state that "printing and dissemination under contract with a private agency or firm would save the government a great deal of money.”
(a) Please explain. (b) In the final analysis, aren't these "savings" passed on to the user in higher prices, and since the government sponsors the majority of research, it ends up paying the cost anyway—including the profit made by the
publisher? Answer 3(a). Costs of platemaking, printing, paper, binding and distribution would be direct saving. Royalty on sales would reimburse some of compilation and editing costs.
Answer 3(b). No. About half of the copies would be purchased abroad with no involvement of U.S. funds. About 25% would be purchased by libraries operating largely with state, local and institutional funds. Other purchases would be made by industry, not involved directly with government programs. We would estimate that about 80% of purchases of commercial editions would be made with non-federal funds. A special price for government purchases could be arranged.
Question 4. On page 3 of your statement you raise the question of the government's liability for inaccurate data.
(a) What would be the liability of a commercial publisher in such a case?
(b) Should there be a difference between the liability of a commercial publisher and the Federal government? Answer 4(a). The liability of a commercial publisher would be the same as the government's, but a commercial publisher would not give an unnecessary warranty of accuracy.
Answer 4(b). No. We request that the proposal for a "mark” be eliminated.
Question 5. On page 4 of your statement you refer to a foreign organization duplicating and selling standard reference data.
(a) Please discuss the problems involved in terms of this bill.
Answer 5(a). Under the bill as now written, many foreign organizations could make changes, additions or deletions with impunity. The U.S. law can protect uses and integrity of data only in the U.S. Further, a foreign organization, not having composition and promotion costs, could produce an offset edition from the U.S. edition that would be much lower in price than the U.S. edition, and would preempt the foreign markets. Such an offset edition might even be exported to the U.S. with impunity, because there seems to be nothing in the bill that prohibits the importation of copies of the data produced legally abroad. In fact, this lack of protection against cheaply-reproduced foreign editions could make the production of U.S. commercial editions very unattractive, if not impossible.
Answer 5(b). Yes. U.S. copyright would give protection in all major countries of the world except the U.S.S.R. and Red China through the Universal Copyright Convention which gives automatic reciprocal copyright. A license would be required to reprint the copyrighted work in any foreign country, and the terms of the license agreement could protect both the substance and form of every reprint abroad. In fact, copyright is the only practicable way in which such protection can be obtained. The copyright does not have to be taken out by the Government; it can be taken out by the private publisher and assigned back to the Government agency or controlled by the Government agency by contract.
Question 6. Is a commercial publisher capable of marketing standard reference data in the form of computer types or cards?
Anwser 6. Yes. Several commercial publishers have this capability and others could readily develop it.
Question 7. In the normal situation where a commercial publisher publishes a document for a Federal agency, does the agency receive a royalty on sales or the use of a certain number of copies, or both? Please discuss and give examples if possible.
Answer 7. In most cases royalty is paid directly into the U.S. Treasury rather than to the Federal agencies involved. In many cases the publishing contracts provide for specified numbers of further copies for Government use in addition to royalty payments. In other cases the contract provides for direct Government purchase at high rates of discount. In general publishers are flexible in contracting on terms that meet the particular needs of each separate case. In almost all cases the contracts require the publishers to sell the published works at stated prices, and in many cases the prices are fixed under competitive bidding. Below is a list of typical titles with a summary of the terms of royalty and allowances provided in each case.
Examples of books published by commercial publishers
“Atomic Energy Encyclopedia in the Life Sciences”. Charles Wesley Shilling, W. B. Saunders Co.
1964. “Sourcebook on Atomic Energy".
Samuel Glasstone, 1958.-) D. Van Nostrand Co. "Atoms for the World”.
Laura Fermi, 1955.. University of Chicago
Press. “Radiation and Immune Mechanisms”.
NOTE.-On these the recent standard royalty rate paid to the Government has been 15 percent of list price and the AEC has received 200 to 250 free copies.
Question 8. What percentage of the total sales of standard reference data do you expect would be made to foreign purchasers if such publications were sold and distributed by a commercial publishing organization ?
Answer 8. At least 50% of initial sales would be abroad and it might run as high as 60%. In recent years 78% of the sale of the International Critical Tables published by McGraw-Hill has been abroad. Although sales records for the earlier years of this publication (the 1920's and the 1930's) are not available, McGraw-Hill estimates that 55% to 60% of total sales have been export sales.
Question 9. In your testimony you raised an objection to the symbol or mark as proposed in the bill. Since the symbol or mark represents a definable standard of quality or care, would it be preferable in your opinion to place at the beginning of each publication what the symbol or mark represents in lieu of the symbol itself (perhaps in the form of a letter signed by the Director of the Bureau)?
(a) If this were done, would it involve fraud for a commercial publisher to republish the letter if the compilation were altered in such a way that the data no longer represented the same standards of quality ?
Answer 9. In our opinion the title of the work and the name of the Bureau of Standards would be sufficient to label the work for quality, but a prefatory statement by the Director of the Bureau would be more explicit and thus desirable.
Answer 9(a). We think so, but this opinion is given without advice of counsel.
Mr. DADDARIO. I would like to recognize for just a few moments Mr. John F. Haley, staff director of the Joint Committee on Printing. Mr. Haley.
STATEMENT OF JOHN F. HALEY, STAFF DIRECTOR, JOINT
COMMITTEE ON PRINTING
Mr. HALEY. Thank you, Mr. Daddario. I am here at the direction of the vice chairman of the Joint Committee on Printing, Mr. Burleson. I am especially happy to see Mr. Miller here because I was going to read a brief letter addressed to him, failing to know he would be here.
Mr. MILLER. If you had notified me, I would have been sure to be here, Mr. Haley.
Mr. Haley. That would have been an imposition because the letter is so short.
Mr. DADDARIO. Our chairman is psychic about these things.
Mr. HALEY. The letter addressed to Chairman Miller of the Committee on Science and Astronautics reads as follows:
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
June 30, 1966.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Reference is made to the bill H.R. 15638 on which hearings are currently being held before the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development of the Committee on Science and Astronautics.
It is recognized that the scope of the referenced bill includes much more than printing from which the bill seeks relief from compliance with the provisions of U.S.C. Title 44. Nevertheless, it is obvious that substantial benefit to the broad objectives sought by the bill can be obtained by utilizing the composition capabilities of the Government Printing Office.
It is suggested that the assessment of testimony received by your committee be made by the staff of the Joint Committee on Printing and submitted for inclusion in your printed hearings. Said assessment shall be recognized as the policy position of the Joint Committee. Sincerely,
[s] OMAR BURLESON,
Vice Chairman. May I add that the assessment will be made by the staff of the Joint Committee on Printing and have the concurrence of the Public Printer and officials of the Government Printing Office when submitted.
Mr. DADDARIO. I do not quite understand what you intend to make an assessment of, Mr. Haley.
Mr. HALEY. The assessment will be made with appropriate consideration being given to the use of existing composition capabilities of the Government Printing Office and the potential use of the highspeed electronic composition system yet to come. Workshops are currently being attended by representatives of departments for programing input to the system. Also, the existing authority contained in title XV, chapter 23 of the United States Code, the legal authority under which the Commerce Clearinghouse operates, will be considered in the assessment. Effective utilization of services obtainable from the Government Printing Office can contribute much to the achievement of the overall objectives desired by H.R. 15638. It may well be that assessment may show, Mr. Chairman, that composition and reproducibles could be supplied by GPO to the Bureau of Standards which would contract with commercial publishers to do the printing and distribution, if advantage over distribution by the Superintendent of Documents is obtainable thereby. Printing by appropriated funds is the mission of the Public Printer, until otherwise ordained by the wisdom of Congress.
Mr. DADDARIO. The assessment, then, would be directed to advising this committee as it makes its deliberations as to the capabilities now available within the Government Printing Office. These capabilities we shall consider together with presently established laws, before we come to final determination as to what should be done under the bill be
Mr. HALEY. You could not be more precise. I may add, there is a big investment in the electronic composition system being placed in the Government Printing Office. With this system the Government Printing Office will soon be able to handle the output from many computers and convert this output at high speed into pages of graphic arts quality for printing. Information can be updated for subsequent fast revised printings. No commercial printing or composition facility has equal capability. So our position will be, as you said, Mr. Chairman, of an advisory nature.
Mr. MILLER. I would welcome your evaluation of this for the committee. If you or Mr. Burleson earlier had spoken to me about it, we might have arranged to have you officially represented here to advise us in this field. When you and I had a discussion about the bill, you felt that the bill should have gone to your committee. I do not blame you for that. The Parliamentarian assigned it to us. I think that printing is the mechanical part of the work that will take place. We