information will eventually and can eventually be published in book form. Selected parts of it will certainly have use in book form. So that this comes back to the question of marketing, the market analysis which a publisher would of necessity have to make before he would seek a license in order to use that material. I think it would be unrealistic to expect our Bureau of Standards to engage in a marketing analysis effort. This would take them too far from their important mission. When it comes to the pricing of these publications, it is interesting to note that the American Chemical Society's most important publication, commonly called Chemical Abstracts, used to be available at a very modest price. The current subscription is $1,250 a year. There is a good reason for this, because there is not a very large market for that particular publication in the sense that if you reduced the price, you could increase your market very rapidly.

The purchasers of that information are industrial organizations, institutions of all kinds, specialized purchasers scattered throughout the world. They very much appreciate the value of the information and are quite prepared to pay a price that no individual purchaser for obvious reasons would even think about paying. I think this may well be the case with some of the data when it appears in book form. Speaking personally in connection with our firm, we might seek out certain information which could be obtained under a royalty (copyright) license in print-out form from one of these monster computers that are all around us today. But we would also know that perhaps as few as 2,000 people might buy that information and those 2,000 purchasers could be scattered throughout the globe. At $5 you still would not sell more than a few individual readers copies of this material. But at a price of $100 which might be the required price, all of those who really need it would be perfectly willing and more than happy to pay.

As Mr. Benjamin mentioned, U.S. scientific information in book form, an area with which he and I are familiar, is very much in demand throughout the world. In the case of many books that we publish under our various imprints the first 2 years sale can be 60 to 70 percent export. Our friends abroad are hungrier, it would appear, than some of our domestic friends. I, too, feel that if a sponsor is needed-I know Dr. Seitz is not too happy with this prospect-use of the National Academy of Sciences and Engineering should be made.

To turn to a more general area of scientific and technical communication, and this is to me an incomprehensible problem, much work is being done. You are familiar with the work done by the COSATI committee. I am not certain that you gentlemen may be aware of the fact that the National Academy has, with funds provided by the National Science Foundation, recently established a new Committee on Scientific and Technical Communication. I have here a copy of the statement which was made to the public at the time of the establishment of the committee. It deals with many of the problems that we are talking about today, but it also is important to note that the interactions and interrelations of the Federal Government and the private sector are a major concern of this committee. This is committee which is going to devote a great deal of time over a period of 3 years on a comprehensive study of the problem. I point to this as

merely an example of the complexity of scientific data and information and its proper distribution. I think that is about all I shall say. Thank you, sir.

(The release follows:)

[News release from National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council]

TWO ACADEMIES ESTABLISH COMMITTEE ON SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL
COMMUNICATION

WASHINGTON.-The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering have jointly established a Committee on Scientific and Technical Communication, at the request of the National Science Foundation, it was announced today.

The committee will provide a focus for participation by scientists and engineers through their societies in the consideration of plans for a national network of information systems in science and technology, as proposed by the Committee on Scientific and Technical Information (COSATI) of the Federal Council for Science and Technology.

In its study of the present status and future requirements of the national scientific and engineering communities with respect to the flow and transfer of scientific and technical information, the committee expects to work closely with COSATI, the Office of Science Information Service of the National Science Foundation, the Office of Science and Technology in the Executive Office of the President, and with the professional groups that perform information services.

Chairman of the committee of 14 leaders in academic and industrial research and technology is Dr. Robert W. Cairns, Director of Research of the Hercules Powder Company, Wilmington, Delaware.

Dr. Cairns, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Research and Development) and Past Chairman of the Division of Chemistry and Chemical Technology of the National Research Council, is presently a Director of the American Chemical Society.

The Committee of Scientific and Technical Communication will give special attention to information activities and policies of groups and organizations in the private sector, both at home and abroad, and to the interactions and interrelations of the Federal Government and the private sector, especially Federal actions or operations that affect substantial portions of the private sector. Of particular concern will be:

1. Methods for promoting more effective relationships between information systems and the principal producers and users of scientific and technical information.

2. Techniques and systems for improving information transfer.

3. New means of providing greater selectivity and consolidation in information transfer.

The committee will make recommendations both to private organizations and to Federal agencies on courses of action required to maintain effective communication within and among fields of science and technology, even as the professional literature in these fields rapidly expands.

The total volume of scientific and technical information, and the demands on existing information systems, have grown at an explosive rate during the postwar period as a consequence of the overall expansion of the nation's research and development activity-to an estimated level of $23 billion during the current year.

DR. WEYL TO HEAD STAFF

In announcing the formation of the Committee on Scientific and Technical Communication, Dr. Frederick Seitz, President of the National Academy of Sciences, also announced the appointment of Dr. F. Joachim Weyl to the execu tive staff of the Academy as a Special Assistant to the President, effective April 1. Dr. Weyl, who has resigned his position as Chief Scientist of the Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy, will serve in one of his first assignments as Executive Secretary of the committee.

With the Office of Naval Research since 1947, Dr. Weyl has been head of its mathematics branch, scientific liaison officer in London, director of the mathematical sciences division, and research director, before becoming Chief Scientist

65-891-66-7

and Deputy Chief of Naval Research in 1961. Dr. Weyl, 51, was born in Switzerland. He received his B.A. degree in 1935 from Swarthmore College, and his M.A. and Ph. D. from Princeton University, in 1937 and 1939, respectively. Members of the Committee on Scientific and Technical Communication are: Robert W. Cairns, Chairman; George E. Holbrook, Vice President, E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc.; J. C. R. Licklider, Consultant to the Director of Research, International Business Machines Corporation; Clarence H. Linder, Vice President and Group Executive (Retired), General Electric Company; H. W. Magoun, Dean, Graduate Division, and Professor of Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles; Nathan M. Newmark, Head, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois; W. H. Pickering, Director, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Byron Riegel, Director of Chemical Research, G. D. Searle and Company; William C. Steere, Director, The New York Botanical Garden; John W. Tukey, Professor of Mathematics, Princeton University; Merle A. Tuve, Director, Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution of Washington; Paul Weiss, University Professor, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Texas; W. B. Wiley, President, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; and Van Zandt Williams, Director, American Institute of Physics.

The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering are private organizations which cooperate under a single Congressional Act of Incorporation to advise the Federal Government, upon request, in any field of science or technology.

Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner.

Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Chairman, I had to go to the telephone during Dr. Seitz' statement. Perhaps this is even a better time to raise the question since we have gone into the percentage of these publications that might be sold overseas as related to the volume that might be utilized here at home. Dr. Seitz made the statement that the United States must continue to be active in the area of international cooperation and must bear its share of the cost for the International Committee and its supporting staff. You are in the publishing business. What in your opinion would be the U.S. fair share of cost in this?

Mr. WILEY. That is an area where I am not competent to comment. I think as far as the printed published results in the private sector you can rest assured we charge our export customers just as much as we charge our domestic customers. We do not feel that we can make any distinction. When it comes to the question you raise, sir, I do not feel competent to comment.

Mr. BENJAMIN. I would comment in this way, that when it comes to the published result of our scientific and technical data-particularly the R. & D. effort of the country-I think the foreign customer, indeed the foreign institutions, most of the money for the import into foreign countries of this kind of material comes from Government funds-ought to pay at least the cost of reproducing and disseminating this material.

When I say "reproducing," I mean the printing, binding, selling costs, et cetera. This would vary from one kind of information to another. In this area the cost of compilation and evaluation would run proportionately higher than would the cost of printing, binding, and distributing. I would say that certainly on this kind of thing the United States should recover 50 to 60 percent of any expense of preparing the material from foreign customers.

Mr. WAGGONNER. That just coincides with the figure of possible sales overseas, too, that you expressed.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes, it does.

Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Benjamin, I would like to comment that the five questions you raised with regard to the use of the symbol or mark are extremely good. They are probably the crux of this entire matter. The committee is certainly going to have to give a reasonable degree of consideration to this area.

I just have one other question and perhaps you cannot make a specific comment on this point. On page 4 of your statement, you refer to sections 7, 8, 9 and said that these sections would provide for no control over copying in foreign countries. Do you know of any way this legislation could be written whereby such control could be provided?

Mr. BENJAMIN. Only through copyright. I do not think there is any other possible way to do it, except by bilateral treaties with some 40 industrial nations. You could pass this legislation and then have a bilateral treaty with 30 or 40 industrial nations, having them accept this.

That would be the only way. But copyright would give you international protection immediately except in the U.S.S.R. and Red China-they being the two big exceptions.

Mr. WAGGONNER. I have no further questions.

Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown.

Mr. BROWN. I have no questions.

Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian.

Mr. VIVIAN. It seems to me that the question of what the first production or the first tabulation of data should cost is a fairly important one. The funds, which are being considered for the National Bureau of Standards, are already being expended by the National Bureau of Standards in many areas and have produced research reports by the hundreds over a period of time. This information then becomes assimilated into reports on certain topic areas, and these are normally Government reports which are not copyrighted.

Mr. BENJAMIN. If they are done in-house and not done by con

tract.

Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Many are done by contract.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes.

Mr. VIVIAN. It is also done by the National Science Foundation, the Defense Department and other agencies. So there are many contract reports produced.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes.

Mr. VIVIAN. There again the Government does not have a copyright in the report normally.

Mr. BENJAMIN. No.

Mr. VIVIAN. But only in something drawn from it.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes, many reports done under contract are copyrighted by the contractor.

Mr. VIVIAN. By the contractor?

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes.

Mr. VIVIAN. But not normally by the publisher.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes, by the publisher.

Mr. VIVIAN. For the contractor?

Mr. BENJAMIN. For the contractor. In some cases the publisher does the copyrighting. In some cases the publisher will take what is commonly called raw data from a government project of some sort.

and will put this into publishable manuscript form and publish it and under the terms of the contract may copyright it. We have done this in many cases.

Mr. VIVIAN. I think the question remains, then, that at some point. U.S. commercial publishers are free to go over a large volume or large quantities of raw data and decide what type of volume you believe is salable and to then reproduce this material as you see fit, which then produces a copyrightable document on your part.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes. But publishers do not usually do this. This is usually done by an author or a group of authors working together who will extract from large bodies a publishable document.

Mr. VIVIAN. Then they contract with you for its publication.
Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes.

Mr. VIVIAN. Nothing which is involved here would prohibit that except for some of the restrictions in sections 5, 6, and 7 of this bill? Mr. BENJAMIN. That is right. Under the present bill.

Mr. VIVIAN. But those restrictions would inhibit you from any reproduction of this material?

Mr. BENJAMIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. VIVIAN. I think it is impossible to turn over to the National Academy of Sciences the volume of money being considered here for the National Bureau of Standards simply because the National Academy of Sciences does not want a large operational program. On the other hand, it would be possible to turn over to the National Academy of Sciences certain editorial and document preparatory duties under contract which would then put the information back in the same channels as were followed many years ago in the publication of the National Critical Tables. Would that be a wise procedure from your point of view?

Mr. BENJAMIN. I will say this, and this follows Mr. Wiley's statement. With our concern over this whole problem of Government monopoly of scientific and technical information, we technical publishers would prefer to have everything possible done outside of Government agencies. The prospect of in-house programs of scientific and technical information-publishing programs that would be directly in competition with publishers, gives us nightmares. Mr. Wiley and I have served on the Science Information Council, in San Francisco, and a number of other Government committees, and we know how often this sort of thing is proposed, and it is knocked down usually one way or another.

In general we say from out point of view everything possible should be done out of the Government agency. We would much prefer to see this done in a professional society than in a Government agency, because a professional society obviously has much more flexibility than a Government agency. It has flexibility in arranging publication and distribution, getting royalties, and this sort of thing.

In general, we would much prefer to see this done, the editorial effort, in the Academy. If the Academy does not want to undertake this and thinks it should not, we are in no position to urge it or recommend it. This is just a general position of preference in the private sector of publishing.

Mr. VIVIAN. I think it is nearly impossible to have this done outside of the Government agencies because of the volume of work.