STATEMENT OF VINCENT T. WASILEWSKI, CHIEF ATTORNEY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION BROADCASTERS Mr. WASILEWSKI. Mr. Chairman, I am the chief attorney of the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters, and I would like, if I may, to read a copy of a letter from the National Association of Broadcasters over the signature of Mr. Fellows, its president, with reference to the Universal Copyright Convention : This is with reference to the scheduled hearing before the Joint Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations and Judiciary Committees on the Universal Copyright Convention. For the purposes of the record, this is to inform you that the board of directors of the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters, upon recommendation of its copyright committee, has adopted a resolution approving the convention and recommending its ratification. It is our belief that ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention by the United States and other free countries will provide greater protection to United States works abroad and will contribute substantially to international good will. Sincerely yours, HAROLD FELLOWS, President of the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters. That is the extent of my testimony. I think it has all been covered before. Mr. Chairman. Senator HICKENLOOPER. May I ask you this: You are, Mr. Wasilewski, in general agreement with the position taken by those who favor the adoption of this convention and the implementing legislation, so there is no use in repeating that affirmative position? Mr. WASILEWSKI. No, sir. Senator HICKENLOOPER. And you do support both, I mean your organization supports both the convention and the implementing legislation? Mr. WASILEWSKI. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Thank you very much, sir; we were glad to have you with us. The next witness will be Mr. Arthur Fisher, Register of Copyrights in the Library of Congress. We are glad to have you with us, Mr. Fisher, and we will be pleased to have your statement. STATEMENT OF ARTHUR FISHER, REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Mr. FISHER. I have prepared, Mr. Chairman, a very brief statement, but I feel that it is largely repetitive of what has gone before, and I think I will ask permission to file it rather than even summarize it. I would like to make myself available to yourself and the committee to answer any questions rather than dealing with innumerable points that occur to me, which I could deal with, but I feel it is unnecessary. Senator HICKENLOOPER. We shall accept your statement, and it will be filed in its entirety. I would like to ask you this, Mr. Fisher, because of your experience and position. Do you believe that the ratification of the convention and the adoption of the implementing legislation are definitely to the advantage of the United States and our citizens? Mr. FISHER. I do. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Do you see in the ratification of the convention or the adoption of this legislation any substantial or material danger to segments of our economy in this country? Mr. FISHER. I do not. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Then you are, Mr. Fisher, in general agreement with the presentations of those who are advocating the ratification of this convention and the adoption of the legislation? Mr. FISHER. I find myself in agreement, both technically and on the economic issues, with the case that has been presented by the proponents of the convention and of the related legislation. Senator HICKENLOOPER. I thank you. Senator Mansfield? Senator MANSFIELD. No questions. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Fisher. There is no use in our replowing this ground, if there is general agreement and your statement will speak for itself. Mr. FISHER. I might ask this further privilege. I understand it is possible that before your transcript is closed, additional statements might be filed beyond those which have been made here orally. These might deal with technical questions which have been largely avoided in the discussion here because of the fact that there really has been no division on the technical issues. If such questions should be raised of a technical nature, I would request the privilege of commenting on them to the committee. Senator HICKENLOOPER. We will be very happy, in fact, to afford you that opportunity; in fact, we would seek your views on it. TECHNICAL PHASES OF CONVENTION AND S. 2559 Mr. FISHER. I might make one comment on the technical phases of the convention and the related legislation. I think it is a striking fact that in a problem as complicated as this, we have unanimity. This has been the result of long discussions within this country and discussions with the foreign groups and interests with which we have negotiated over the past 7 years. One of the difficult problems has been the question as to whether we should use this convention and this legislation to make other changes in United States copyright law. I believe, looking back historically to an earlier period, one of the reasons for lack of success was that in dealing with the international situation endeavors were made to use the occasion to amend the domestic law. There have been 1 or 2 persons, whose names I will not mention, experienced students of the copyright law and the copyright situation, who have wanted to use this convention and the related legislation as an occasion to make possible amendments in the law. At the present time, I believe they have abandoned that position, but it is possible that suggestions in that direction might come before the committee. Senator MANSFIELD. Mr. Fisher, don't you think we ought to cross that bridge when we come to it, and get this legislation settled one way or the other? Mr. FISHER. I believe that thoroughly, and that is the reason I am refraining from taking the time of the committee to discuss these technical questions. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Thank you very much, Mr. Fisher, and if the occasion arises we shall get in touch with you on any of these matters on which you would be helpful. Mr. FISHER. Thank you. (The prepared statement of Mr. Fisher follows:) STATEMENT OF ARTHUR FISHER, REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, WASHINGTON, D. C., BEFORE JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS AND JUDICIARY COMMITTEES, SENATOR BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER, CHAIRMAN, ON S. 2559, APRIL 8, 1954 My name is Arthur Fisher. I reside in Kensington, Md. I am the Register of Copyrights of the United States, which position I have held since September 12, 1951. Prior to that, since 1946, I have served successively as Associate Register and Acting Register of Copyrights. The Copyright Office has looked at the Universal Copyright Convention and the related legislation from the standpoint of the general public interest. In the opinion of everyone with whom I am familiar who has studied the matter in the Copyright Office, the convention is an opportunity to take a tremendous step forward in furtherance of the interests of the United States in its international copyright relations. Copyright protection abroad for the books, periodicals, music, motion pictures, and other literary and artistic works produced in the United States has not been as satisfactory or as certain as we would desire. Our present system of bilateral arrangements with many individual countries makes it necessary for our producers to meet the particular requirements of the domestic laws of each country, requirements and formalities that differ from one country to another. practical consequence is that many of the works of our citizens secure no protection in some countries or inadequate or dubious protection. The To obtain more adequate protection our people have resorted to the device of publishing their works in Canada, England, or elsewhere, at the same time they publish them here, in order to secure protection in the countries of the Berne Union, of which we are not a member. First or simultaneous publication in Canada or England gives the works of our citizens the status of Canadian or British works under the Berne Convention. We thus enjoy the protection afforded by the Berne Union through the grace of its member countries and not as a matter of right, a grace that they might withdraw as they see fit, and which some of them have threatened to withdraw from time to time because of the added requirements we impose for protection of their works here. Since we have considered some of the provisions of the Berne Convention incompatible with our system of copyright, we have chosen to remain outside of the Berne Union. Our efforts have been directed toward the establishment of an international convention that would afford our citizens more adequate protection abroad while preserving the essential features of our own copyright system. Seven years of study and negotiation have gone into the development of the Universal Copyright Convention. The essential thing to note about the Universal Copyright Convention is that it represents substantial concessions to our viewpoint by the Berne Union countries and others. In general terms, the basic principle of the Universal Convention is that each member country will give substantially the same protection to works of citizens of another member country, and to work first published in another member country, as it gives to works of its own citizens published in its own territory. Our citizens, by meeting certain of the present requirements of our own law, would be entitled to protection in all other member countries. Citizens of those countries who meet the requirements of their own laws would be given protection here. Other requirements of our present law would be waived for foreign works. The necessary changes in our present law are those provided for in the proposed legislation, S. 2559. The convention also specifies certain minimum standards of protection to be given by all member countries. These standards are already met by our present law. Some of the other countries signatory to the convention would have to raise their present standards to meet the minimum requirements. The discussion and negotiations leading to the Universal Convention were participated in by representatives of many different interests in this country concerned with copyright, as well as representatives of the United States Government. It is gratifying to note that the convention has met with the approval of virtually every interested group in this country, including writers, composers, and artists; the publishing, broadcasting, and motion-picture industries; libraries and learned societies; and bar associations. The only group opposed has been the printing trades unions who have expressed the fear that relaxation of the requirement that books of foreign authors in the English language be manufactured in the United States may deprive our printers of some work. All available information including careful study of the economics of the book-publishing industry indicates that this fear is not warranted. At most, the total number of books that might be involved is a very tiny segment of the printing industry; and even of this tiny segment, it seems unlikely that any sizable portion now manufactured in this country would be affected. In fact, it is no less likely that the stimulus which the convention may give to the sale of our books abroad would increase the volume of books manufactured here. Our international copyright relations have not only been unsatisfactory to us, but have been the source of constant irritation and criticism in intellectual circles abroad which are highly influential in forming public opinion in their countries. We have been the leader in developing the Universal Copyright Convention, and in a real sense the convention is one between the United States and the rest of the free world. Since the other countries largely acceded to our views in drafting the Universal Convention, our failure to ratify it could be expected to arouse more bad feeling and to kill for many years to come any chance to improve our international copyright relations. On the other hand, I believe our ratification of the convention would bring us a great deal of good will among the free countries of the world. It would make us participants with them in an international system of copyright protection to which all could adhere, instead of our present undignified position of taking advantage of the favor they have so far allowed us of securing protection under the Berne Convention. One final point deserves thoughtful attention. As a leader of the free world in the fight against totalitarianism, we are vitally interested in facilitating the distribution abroad of the literary, musical, and pictorial works produced in the United States and reflecting our way of life. The assurance of copyright protection abroad under the Universal Convention would be a factor of prime importance in stimulating the distribution through private initiative and creative enterprise of our intellectual works in other countries. Senator HICKENLOOPER. I have three statements, one in the nature of a letter received from J. Raymond Tiffany of the Book Manufacturers' Institute, Inc., of 25 West 43d Street, New York, in favor of the ratification of the convention and the implementing legislation which will be placed in the record. (The document referred to follows:) Mr. C. C. O'DAY, BOOK MANUFACTURERS' INSTITUTE, INC., Clerk, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. O'DAY: The Book Manufacturers' Institute will not desire time to testify before the Foreign Relations and Judiciary Committees on the Universal Copyright Convention and the implementing legislation. Our board of directors authorized President Sidney Satenstein to send the following telegram to the subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee on March 17 which clearly states our position: "The board of directors of the Book Manufacturers' Institute has authorized me to wire you that after careful consideration we are now prepared to urge the ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention and in connection therewith to withdraw our opposition to the necessary modification of the manufacturing clause proposed in H. R. 6670 and H. R. 6616. We are prepared to give up to this extent the protection afforded us by the manufacturing clause because we share to the fullest the desire to make American books as useful to this country abroad as possible and to uphold the reputation of the United States in the protection of the rights of all authors, composers, and artists. We hope for an expansion of the sale of American books abroad that will more than offset any loss we may suffer from the modification of the manufacturing clause. We unite with the rest of the book world in seeking this common goal, and we are confident that publishers and authors in turn join us in realizing the necessity of the preserving and extending a healthy book manufacturing industry in the United States." Sincerely yours, J. RAYMOND TIFFANY. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Then there was a statement forwarded to the committee by Mr. Robert Gibbon, secretary of the Curtis Publishing Co., and on behalf of the Curtis Publishing Co., in favor of the appropriate legislation to enable the United States to become a party to the Universal Copyright Convention, which will be filed and included in the record. (The document referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF THE CURTIS PUBLISHING CO. ON S. 2559 BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHTS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY APRIL 6, 1954. The Curtis Publishing Co. favors the adoption of appropriate legislation enabling the United States to become a party to the Universal Copyright Convention of 1952, and to that end urges the enactment of S. 2559. We favor this enabling legislation and ratification of the convention primarily for two reasons. We feel that such action will stimulate cultural intercourse with foreign countries and promote international understanding and cooperation. Also, the authors who contribute to our publications, and this company to a lesser extent, have an interest in securing more adequate protection of American copyrights abroad than is presently available. The informational media guaranty program presently administered by the United States Information Agency was and is maintained in recognition of the important stake that this country has in the continued distribution of American books, magazines, and other cultural media abroad. That program was adopted to circumvent foreign currency restrictions which might curtail such distribution. We believe that ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention would eliminate another important obstacle to distribution of American cultural media abroad by assuring American authors and publishers of greater copyright protection there. The idea that fairness demands reciprocity of treatment is fundamental in international relations. Although this country failed to join in the Berne convention because it did not conform to our concept of copyright, or to adopt internal legislation that afforded to nationals of parties to that convention copyright protection in the United States corresponding to that afforded by the convention, American publishers, like ourselves, and American authors and artists presently enjoy (as a matter of grace) much of the Berne convention copyright protection abroad through the expedient of simultaneous publication of magazines and books in the United States and in one or more countries party to the convention. The Universal Copyright Convention is consistent with American concepts of copyright. If the United States fails to join in it, it is possible that other Nations will conclude that American authors, artists and publishers do not deserve to enjoy international copyright protection and they may be encouraged to adopt retaliatory legislation to deprive us of even the imperfect foreign copyright protection that we now enjoy. On the other hand, if we join in the convention, our nationals will enjoy broader international copyright protection as a matter of right, not of grace. Furthermore, foreign nations and their nationals will be forced to recognize that in the limited areas in which our Federal Government is able to cooperate in the beneficial simplification and unification of international private law, this country is willing to cooperate to the extent of giving them in the United States the same rights and privileges that we expect to enjoy in theirs. This company is not apprehensive that the greater influx of foreign literary and artistic works which may result from our extending |