Mr. DADDARIO. It is to that that I meant the question should be asked. Do you believe that the recoverable amount, using Mr. Vivian's figures, warrants its inclusion in this measure?

Dr. HOLLOMON. There are two aspects of the problem which are separable. One is who recovers and how it is recovered, and Mr. Vivian has expressed a view on that subject. The second is how much can be recovered. I don't follow exactly the arithmetic of Mr. Vivian at the moment-I have no doubt about it but I just don't follow it. I believe that a fraction, and I said something of the order of 25 percent or more depending on the particular volume, should be recovered, and that it should be significant enough so that a judgment can be made as to whether or not the document is really useful. I believe this would be a desirable administrative feature, and further that the charges should be borne, to some degree at least, by the person who uses them so that he can make a trade-off judgment to determine whether he gets the data anew or buys a compilation.

Mr. VIVIAN. Once the compilation has been done within the Department or the Bureau of Standards, then the costs are already committed. Your real decision lies when you have decided to take on the effort to produce such a compilation.

Dr. HOLLOMON. But there are other related compilations for which experience would determine the degree of utility by such a procedure. For example, if one would get the properties of semiconductors in a certain class and publish those, he could get experience from that with respect to semiconductors of another class.

Mr. VIVIAN. It seems to me the basic question you have to answer is, once you have made the compilation, and once the publishing effort has been done, from then on the reproduction costs is the only significant additional cost. Our purpose in this whole bill is not to limit information to users but to maximize it. Therefore, your main decision is when you decide to make the compilation. It is presumed that you will not make it on the basis of how many people will buy it but on the basis of the need for the information.

Dr. HOLLOMON. Right.

Mr. VIVIAN. Having done that, I see no sense in charging higher prices for the document.

Dr. HOLLOMON. What I was just trying to say was, there are similar documents for which experience can be garnered. Second, the question is whether or not, if we permitted private publication of these documents, a private publisher could recover his editorial cost.

Dr. ASTIN. Let me give what I think is another type of relevant example here. I think this authority would increase the usefulness and the degree of dissemination of our information. Suppose we are making a thermodynamic compilation and we put the data out oriented in a form according to the nature of the material in which the properties are described. This fulfills our responsibility of getting the information out. But we learn that there is a real interest in having the data reoriented and classified according to property. We put this out. If we are able to recover the costs of this type of operation, we are much more likely to do it than if it becomes a drain on our ability to perform our other activities.

Dr. HOLLOMON. Suppose we put out this compilation right here, and you decided you would like to draw from this compilation all the

data on oxides and would like those in tables in a different form than you have now. You are the only fellow who comes in asking for this. Now I ask you, why shouldn't we be able to furnish that to you at full cost under those circumstances if you want to pay it, and not penalize appropriations which provided that document to the world at large? Mr. VIVIAN. Are you restricted from doing that at the present time? Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, if this service results in a publication.

Mr. VIVIAN. What do you do for the second person who wants the same compilation?

Dr. HOLLOMON. It seems to me what you would have to do under these circumstances is to charge him with the full cost of reproducing that document. That is why I say judgment is involved in the matter. It seems to me you would have to allow some discretion.

Mr. VIVIAN. You want the first man to pay the full costs of the compilation?

Dr. HOLLOMON. If he is willing to.

Mr. VIVIAN. To contract with you for the compilation of the document?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Or somebody else.

Mr. VIVIAN. What about the second man?

Dr. HOLLOMON. It seems to me it would be reasonable to anticipate there would be a second man in the first instance. If you were the only person, I think it would be only appropriate for you and Dr. Astin to find out if there were others who needed the data in that form, hopefully reproducing the copies and sharing the cost against those companies. If we had done that, the cost would be a fair share. If on the other hand, you were the only fellow we could find in a reasonable period that needed the data, we did the compilation, the master was set up, and then a second man comes in, I think he should bear the incremental cost.

Mr. VIVIAN. Such as the costs the Government Printing Office would charge?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Such as that.

Mr. VIVIAN. My inclination is to support the bill if some statements as to the procedures to be followed would accompany the bill as legislative intent.

Dr. HOLLOMON. Right.

Mr. DADDARIO. This is a matter for determination by the committee which, of course

Mr. MILLER. It goes into the report.

Dr. HOLLOMON. I think that is an entirely appropriate thing to do, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DADDARIO. As I said yesterday, Mr. Vivian, we do not necessarily need to follow this language exactly. There will be I expect changes, and we will stress in the report those parts of the legislation which bothers the committee.

Mr. VIVIAN. At the present time there is a very large project, socalled Sigma project, in the AEC. Will they use this symbol and will you issue the documents?

Dr. HOLLOMON. I don't know what the Sigma project is.

Mr. VIVIAN. The AEC collects a very large amount of data on the cross sections of various types of impact. These are voluminous, to put it mildly. Do you intend to reproduce these with a data symbol?

Dr. HOLLOMON. If they meet the procedures, we would permit the AEC to put that stamp on their data.

Mr. VIVIAN. Now, at the present time, is that data issued by the AEC under the Government Printing Office?

Dr. HOLLOMON. I can't answer the question, but in general experience AEC, I believe, has the authority to go to private contractors for printing. I believe that is the case.

Mr. VIVIAN. And presumably if there is any dispute between yourselves and the AEC over what data should have the stamp on it, you would have the authority to make the decision?

Dr. HOLLOMON. No. The question is whether or not they follow a procedure, not a particular set of data. What we would do is have an interagency group look at how these standards and procedures would be set up. They would be published. Whether another agency could use the mark on its compilation would be determined on whether or not they followed the agreed upon published procedures. They don't have to if they don't want to.

Mr. VIVIAN. You would not review their actions but only the nature of the procedures?

Dr. HOLLOMON. The procedures. That is all that could be done. To review every evaluation would be a prodigious job.

Mr. VIVIAN. At the present time this standard now would relate to that matter published in the United States. As you may know, there are many scientific documents now being reproduced in Hong Kong and other places and being sold at very low cost.

Dr. HOLLOMON. Right.

Mr. VIVIAN. Is there any means that this could be prevented or at least not become troublesome?

Dr. HOLLOMON. We suggested a revision of the wording with respect to section 7(b). Instead of the word "copy," "reproduce for sale." This, I presume, although I will have to talk to the lawyers about it, would prevent the sale in the United States.

Mr. DADDARIO. Let's not come to any particular decision about that. Mr. MILLER. That is rather involved with regard to some treaties we may have with Britain and China, as to whether they can do this

or not.

Dr. HOLLOMON. I understand, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. VIVIAN. Will there be any compensation to copyright owners for material that is already in existence in other documents?

Dr. HOLLOMON. The way this would operate would be that you have to ask, as you do in any case, whether or not data or things that were previously copyrighted could be used or whether they were already in the public domain.

Mr. VIVIAN. But you do concede that you could have such data marked by the mark and then possibly republished by some other publishing firm?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes.

Mr. VIVIAN. It is conceivable that what came out of a journal or a document, a mark could be put on it, and under a contract by yourselves republished by some other publisher?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Never in that form. Only as a number. Only as a number.

Mr. VIVIAN. Do these firms which publish these tables consider themselves as having any copyright to them?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Certainly.

Mr. VIVIAN. To the numbers themselves?

Dr. HOLLOMON. No, to the volumes.

Mr. VIVIAN. Therefore, you would not be violating their copyright interests?

Dr. HOLLOMON. I do not believe so.

Mr. VIVIAN. What amount of money do you anticipate to be asked of the appropriations committees as a result of the authorizations contained in this bill?

Dr. HOLLOMON. We believe that over a 4- or 5-year period, that the level of the expenses to operate the system will be on the order of $20 million a year.

Mr. VIVIAN. Do you have a budget breakdown for that amount of funds?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, we do.

Mr. VIVIAN. I would be interested in having that submitted, if it is available. That completes my questions.

Mr. DADDARIO. Without objection, that will be submitted for the

record.

(The information requested is as follows:)

Estimated annual costs for SRDS program when fully implemented

Mr. YEAGER. One question for clarification, if I may. I think you have seen the letter which we have received from the Library of Congress Copyright Office.

Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, I have.

Mr. YEAGER. It indicates that, in their opinion, they believe that section 7(a) of the bill seems intended to create the equivalent of a copyright which, unlike the present law, is free of the requirement to protect users and the public. The proposed copyright law says that copyright protection is not available for any work of the U.S. Government, and defines the work of the U.S. Government as being a work prepared by an officer or employee of the U.S. Government within the scope of his official duties. As Mr. Vivian mentioned, on the bill which is presently before the House Judiciary Committee, the Department of Commerce testified that this provision be retained.

Is there a conflict between what you are suggesting here and the previous testimony of the Department, or do you consider that section 7(b) does not, as the Library Copyright Office has suggested, amount to a copyright?

Dr. HOLLOMON. I don't know quite how to answer that question. I will answer in this way. We believe that what was proposed here and the degree to which it is an exception to the general statement of copyrights is appropriate. There should be, and can be, exceptions where demonstrated need exists. In other words, we don't believe that is inconsistent with the general proposition of the Secretary of Commerce. There are conditions in which exceptions should be made, but the exceptions should not be made administratively, but by statute, as is being suggested here.

The second question has to do with the limitation of time, as to the length of time. We would not object at all to being limited to some degree as to the time for which the stamp would be valid. The third question has to do with whether or not this is or is not actually establishing copyright. I assure you our intent was to be liberal but to maintain assurance. It was not to establish a Government monopoly in that sense. It has, however, in practice, I believe, a large number of the characteristics of a copyright.

So to answer your question as fairly as I can, I believe that to be the fact.

Mr. YEAGER. Thank you.

Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to inject a question there. Copyright on ordinary copy expires after some period of time and anyone is free to publish the document thereafter. Would this also apply to standard reference data?

Dr. HOLLOMON. That is right. The situation here is that if this system were fully established we would be revising such compilations periodically. We tried to say how frequently such a revision would be desirable or necessary, and, therefore, in that context we thought it would be appropriate to limit the time if the committee so desired. Mr. VIVIAN. It seems to me some comprehension of the time role of the stamp is important. It is not obvious to me in this legislation or in my own mind at this point.

Dr. HOLLOMON. I tried to at least discuss that question. We tried to say how freqently we believe it to be proper and appropriate to revise the compilation, either to set them out in a modified form or reevaluate them. We said something about 6 or 7 years. Therefore, 10 years may not be an inappropriate limitation.

Mr. VIVIAN. To use a mark which contains a date?

Dr. HOLLOMON. That is right. To use a mark which contains a date. Mr. DADDARIO. Are there any further questions, gentlemen? If not, this committee will adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning at the same place.

65-891-66--5