PERSONNEL The members of the board of trustees are the authorized representatives of Eastern Educational Network member stations and organizations. There are five officers of the network, including the chairman of the board, president, two vice presidents, and a treasurer. These five officers constitute the executive committee. All these personnel are unpaid and serve in this capacity voluntarily. The nine network staff members, including the executive director and all others listed below that position on the chart, are full-time, salaried employees of the network. Duties and responsibilities of this small staff are numerous, including overall administration of network activities; program evaluation, acquisition and coordination; planning and development; research; conducting workshops and conferences; and in many other ways attempting to increase the quality and quantity of an educational television service for many audiences in the Northeast United States. Outside professional services (legal, engineering, insurance) Office rent____ $72, 755 3,500 6, 200 7,000 13.600 Travel and conference__ Communications (telephone, teletype, telegraph). Informational services___ Contingency- Total_____ 5,000 2,000 4, 120 114, 175 SUGGESTED REVISION OF NEW SECTION 111 PROPOSED BY AD HOC EDUCATIONAL COMMITTEE ON COPYRIGHT Add at end of proposed section 111, the following: "Nor is it an infringement of copyright for a copy or phonorecord lawfully made pursuant to this section to be given, loaned, exchanged, or otherwise made available for use by another person or organization similar to the original maker, either directly or through a nonprofit association, group, institution, or other agency established for such purpose, if: (i) the making of such copy or phonorecord by the user itself would not have constituted an infringement of copyright under this section; and (ii) the gift, loan, exchange, or other availability of such copy or phonorecord is without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and without any charge other than the actual cost incurred therein." Mr. KASTEN MEIER. Is that all, Mr. Tenzer? Mr. PoFF. I am not certain I understand the entire thrust of one portion of your testimony. Do I understand correctly that if the bill as presently drafted should become law, you anticipate that your network, assuming as you say it can survive, would act in the nature of a clearinghouse for the individual member stations of your network with respect to clearance of copyrights and negotiation with copyright owners? Mr. QUAYLE. No, sir. The individual responsibility for making the copyright clearance, obtaining those clearances, would be on the stations themselves because they are the ones who are producing the programs and they would assure us when they contribute a series for distribution that they have obtained all necessary clearances. The network would not do this for the stations themselves. They would do it. Mr. PoFF. It would not be possible for the network to do it for the station? Mr. QUAYLE. Probably not. I would go back to the chart which Mr. Aleinikoff presented to you. Just 1 of our stations in Pittsburgh, during 1 broadcasting week, used 563 items which may have been copyrighted or which would at least have been investigated. If you multiply that by the 17 stations, for us to cover the programs each week would take more than our entire staff now. We would be able to do nothing else. Mr. POFF. The alternative would be, of course, that each individual station would do its own clearing and would that not be a greater total cost cumulatively than if it were done centrally by the network? Mr. QUAYLE. It may be, except that the principle on which we now operate, which has proved to be successful, is one of mutual cooperation and free contribution by the stations. The one thing that we are concerned about, as I tried to emphasize, and the one place where we go beyond the request of the ad hoc committee, is in the ability to make copies for mutual exchange. Mr. POFF. Multiple copies? Mr. QUAYLE. That is right. I do not interpret this to be too much different from 109 (5), where it indicates a transmitting or retransmitting of a program without commercial advantage and without change would not be an infringement of the Copyright Act. We are retransmitting not simultaneously only because of the delay in the shipment of the tape. If we are transmitting by a live interconnected system this would be exempted under section 109 (5). Mr. POFF. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you very much, Mr. Quayle, for your contribution. The next and I believe the last witness this morning is Mr. Mervel Lunn, director of broadcasting and representing the Oklahoma City Public Schools Broadcasting Center. Is Mr. Lunn present? The Penn State Educational Television Advisory Committee to be represented by Miss Martha Gable. Miss Gable is not here. Their statements will be received for the record and included without objection, if submitted. Without objection, another statement, that of Carl J. Megel, Washington representative of the American Federation of Teachers, will be accepted and made a part of the record. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT BY CARL J. MEGEL, WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Carl J. Megel. I am the Washington representative for the American Federation of Teachers, a national organization of more than 100,000 classroom teachers affiliated with the AFL-CIO. This statement is being presented in behalf of the interests of the classroom teachers and the adverse effect which the passage of H.R. 4347, the copyright law revision, will have upon education throughout the Nation, unless suitably amended. While it is true that the copyright law has not been amended since 1909, certain proposals incorporated in H.R. 4347 would have the effect of depriving the classroom teachers and students of certain educational advantages which have grown up under present law and have been accepted as necessary teaching practices. The 1909 law provided complete and automatic exemptions of copyright materials for certain educational use. Under its provision, the Nation's classroom teachers were permitted limited use of any copyrighted material of historical, poetical, or musical nature so long as the use of the material was not contravened under a "for profit" motive and, in fact, have made limited copies for the very same nonprofit motive. Section 106 of chapter 1 definitely specifies that: "the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive right * * *" of ownership and use. Accordingly, without the present law's "for profit" provision, the educational exemption previously specified would be rescinded. In substance, H.R. 4347 means that classroom teachers, excepting upon payment of a fee, would be prevented from reproducing by any duplicating process copyrighted materials, such as maps, charts, selected literary subjects, excerpts of pamphlets, magazines, or books. Likewise, tape recordings and audiovisual techniques could not be used without permission of the copyright owner or upon the payment of a fee for its use. The proposed legislation (section 107 of ch. 1) states that: "the fair use of a copyrighted work is not an infringement of copyright." However, the onus of proof of "fair use" would be placed upon the classroom teacher because of its uncertainty and vagueness and even though a teacher innocently infringed upon the copyright, such teacher would still be liable for statutory damages. From my own many years' experience as a classroom teacher, I can testify at first hand the classroom limitations which the elimination of present educational practices and teaching techniques likely to be caused by the proposed legislation would impose. The classroom teacher faced with an alternative of a possible damage suit for copyright infringement would be faced with two choices: first, clearance of copyrighted materials; and second, exclusion of copyrighted material from the classroom. For many years the American Federation of Teachers has been proclaiming a deterioration of American education because pathetically low teachers' salaries have created teacher shortages which compelled the employment of improperly certificated teaching personnel. The emphasis which we have placed upon low teacher salaries has brought about a slight revision upward. Nevertheless, general school board purchasing policies plus present salaries would preclude the purchase of copyrighted materials in sufficient amount to be useful in the great majority of today's classrooms. The fact that considerably more than a majority of all teachers are engaged in some form of moonlighting to supplement their salaries gives unmistakable evidence of this fact. This being the case, the teacher would, therefore, resort to the second alternative and eliminate the use of copyrighted materials. So doing would mean a complete revision of teaching techniques, doing without useful teaching media, and resulting in deteriorating instruction. A student in such a classroom would be deprived of the tools so essential to education in this, the space age society. It, therefore, becomes evident that restricting the rights of teachers and schools to use copyrighted educational material as proposed in H.R. 4347 will not serve the public interest. In the first place, it would mean no additional revenue to the owner of the copyright since the purchase of the material by the teachers would become almost negligible and, second, because it will seriously penalize boys and girls in the classroom by depriving them of essential educational opportunity. CONCLUSION I submit the right of a copyright owner to full protection for his art and to remuneration for his efforts. I respectfully urge that an automatic educational exemption be incorporated in any revision. Mr. KASTENMEIER. The Chair desires to state that next week on Wednesday we will hear from the Music Operators of America, phonograph manufacturers, and others, essentially relating to the jukebox question. Mr. PoFF. Does the Chairman anticipate that next week we will have no controversy among the witnesses? Mr. KASTENMEIER. We trust that Wednesday will be characteristically a placid day. On Thursday we will have the record industry and on Friday we are expecting the National Community Television Association to testify. So again, next week we will have a full schedule. Let me also state to the committee the hope that our regular chairman, Ed Willis, will have fully recovered and be back chairing hearings next week. That, then, concludes today's hearings. This subcommittee stands adjourned until 10 o'clock Wednesday morning next. (Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, June 9, 1965.) |