ORGANIZATIONS OPPOSED TO UNIVERSAL COPYRIGHT CONVENTION International Allied Printing Trades Association. International Typographical Union. Union Employers Section, Printing Industry of America. New Orleans Photo Engravers Union. Youngstown Typographical Union, No. 200. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Senator Fulbright. OPPOSITION TO S. 2559 Senator FULBRIGHT. I have a few questions. As far as you know, is the International Allied Printing Trades Association the only organization in opposition to this bill? Mr. KALIJARVI. That is true, as far as I know. UNITED STATES IMPORT OF BOOKS Senator FULBRIGHT. In your statement you said that we exported $24 million last year, but you do not say how much we imported. You say twice as much. Do you have the exact figure? Mr. KALIJARVI. We do not have the exact figure. Senator FULBRIGHT. You are sure that we exported twice as much as we imported, in books? Mr. KALIJARVI. That is correct. We will get the exact figures for you, for the record. OPPOSITION TO S. 2559 Senator FULBRIGHT. I will wait until the printing trades come on, to find out what their position is. To your knowledge, no other organization is opposing this bill? Mr. KALIJARVI. No; that is right. Senator FULBRIGHT. There is unanimity among the writers and producers, let us say, other than the printing trades; is that right? Mr. KALIJARVI. That is correct. Senator FULBRIGHT. I believe that is all. EFFECT ON POWERS OF CONGRESS Senator HICKENLOOPER. Dr. Kalijarvi, are you prepared to answer specifically the question as to what effect this convention, this treaty, if adopted, would have upon the enlargement of the powers of the Federal Congress in the fields in which they do not already possess those powers? Mr. KALIJARVI. Part of my statement was addressed to that, Mr. Chairman. As I understand it, there would be no expansion of powers. The legislation is specifically pursuant to section 8, article I of the Constitution. Senator HICKENLOOPER. I am not talking about the legislation, I am talking about the treaty. Mr. KALIJARVI. The treaty also, Mr. Chairman. Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that is all. Senator FULBRIGHT. You would not consider that you are the proper witness to go into the position of the trade unions and typographical unions? Mr. KALIJARVI. No. Senator FULBRIGHT. I did not want you to get away if you are the one who would testify about it. Mr. KALIJARVI. No. Senator FULBRIGHT. That is all. Senator HICKENLOOPER. Thank you, Mr. Kalijarvi. The next witness will be Verner W. Clapp, Acting Librarian of Congress. STATEMENT OF VERNER W. CLAPP, ACTING LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS Mr. CLAPP. I am Verner W. Clapp, Acting Librarian of Congress. I have a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very happy to appear before this committee to represent the Library of Congress in support of the ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention signed at Geneva, September 6, 1952, by the United States and 39 other countries, and now submitted by the President of the United States to the Senate for its advice and consent prior to ratification; and also in support of the accompanying legislation, S. 2559, a bill to amend the Copyright Act in a few particulars necessary to make it possible for the United States to ratify the convention. The Library of Congress completely and unreservedly urges the ratification of the convention and the enactment of S. 2559. PURPOSE OF CONVENTION The purpose of the Universal Copyright Convention is to provide an effective and simple international method of protecting literary and artistic materials. Since the treaty expressly provides that at the time the instrument of ratification is deposited, each State must be prepared under its domestic law to give effect to the terms of the convention, you are being asked to enact S. 2559, which amends the copyright law in the few instances necessary before ratification can be effected. The objective of this treaty-effective and simple international protection of literary works-is so elementary that it may be difficult to understand why it has not been accomplished in years past. With this in mind, I would like to briefly outline the past history of international copyright relations in this country, so that you may have a better basis for understanding the essential problem. HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT RELATIONS The United States Constitution provides (in art. 1, sec. 8) that the Congress shall have power to promote the progress of science and the useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. The first legislation under this provision was quickly enacted in 1790; but for more than a century the application of the constitutional provision was restricted exclusively to American authors and American writings, while the writings of foreign authors were totally excluded from protection. At the beginning of the period, this was a wholly normal situation, but as the 19th century proceeded, and intellectual and artistic works circulated even more rapidly and widely, the situation changed completely. Because foreign authors could not get protection in the United States, their works were pirated here, and the 19th century has been labeled as being in the United States the age of literary piracy. Though there were some notable examples of fair dealing by leading American publishers toward foreign authors, there was no law compelling such fair dealings, and the works of Dickens, Thackeray, Stevenson, and others were freely pirated in this country. Even major works, such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, were pirated. Entire publishing enterprises were carried on and magazines were established because of this ability to take the works of foreign authors without payment. At the end of the 19th century a moral revulsion developed against what preachers of the day called "the national sin of literary piracy." Public opinion mobilized. Notable American authors-James Russell Lowell, Mark Twain, Edward Eggleston, George W. Cable, James Whitcomb Riley, and many others donated funds raised by readings and lectures to help correct the situation. In 1891 a revision of the Copyright Act at last gave protection to foreign authors, but with a proviso-the proviso that they comply with our formalities, including the arduous and irrelevant requirement that their works be manufactured in the United States. Under the act of 1891, all foreign authors were included in this proviso. Nevertheless, the acknowledgment by the United States of the basic principle of according copyright to foreign authors, under whatever terms, marked a great advance in our relations with foreign countries, and provided a measure of protection not only to the foreign authors but also to the American authors in competition with them. Five years previously, as Mr. Kalijarvi has reminded you, in 1886, a group including the principal European countries had at Berne reached a new copyright agreement by which copyright obtained in one member country would be recognized and protected by all other member states without formalities. You will hear more in these hearings concerning one provision of the convention-the so-called "side door into Berne." That is to say, a side door through which to secure protection under the Berne Convention. I will ask your permission briefly to explain this, for it is through this "side door" that most American publishers have been enabled to obtain copyright protection in European countries. "SIDE DOOR" PROTECTION Article 6 of the Berne Convention provides that a work first published in a member state-even though not by a national of that stateshall enjoy in that state and in all other member countries the rights granted by the Berne Convention. United States publishers and authors have utilized and still utilize this "side door" by the simple expedient of sending copies of their books to Toronto or London for sale on the same day as it was published in this country. Except when challenged in some countries as only a colorable publication, this achieves automatic copyright protection in the 43 nations which are members of Berne. The same sixth article of the convention contains in addition however, a Damoclean sword which may possibly cut the latchstring to the "side door." I refer to the provision that where a member state considers that a nonmember state fails to protect in an adequate manner the authors of any Union country, that country may deny this "side-door" protection. Further, if one member country so denies this protection, the other Berne countries likewise may automatically deny this right to the nonunion nationals. Thus the position of the United States, in trying to enforce rights abroad under a treaty to which the United States is not a party, is most unsatisfactory, and a leading exporter of American books has recently stated that "as a practical matter it is becoming increasingly difficult for American publishers to enforce their rights in foreign countries." UNITED STATES BILATERAL COPYRIGHT ARRANGEMENTS The question may properly be asked whether our present copyright law does not afford other means of achieving protection for our United States authors in foreign countries so that our authors will not have to rely upon provisions of a treaty to which this country is not a party. The answer is "Yes, it does." Our law authorizes the establishment of bilateral copyright relations with other countries. Under this authorization the United States has entered into some forty separate bilateral arrangements with various governments; but relying on these arrangements would require a United States author or publisher to be familiar with all the laws, procedures, formalities and endless red tape of each of 40 countries in turn in order to assure himself of complete protection in all of them. Because of this obviously unsatisfactory situation, it is readily understandable why United States authors and publishers rely on the previously mentioned "side door" of the Berne Convention for their protection abroad. UNITED STATES NOT MEMBER OF BERNE CONVENTION Following the enactment of 1891, and during the first half of this century, a number of attempts were made to obtain legislative approval for United States admission to the Berne Union-during the twenties, throughout the thirties, and up to the threshold of World War II. But due to a difference in concept between European and American copyright, as well as to conflicts between various commercial interests in this country, all efforts failed. BACKGROUND OF THIS CONVENTION By 1945, however, it was obvious that this country would probably never join Berne, and efforts have consequently been directed toward finding a formula to which both the United States and the Berne Union countries, as well as other countries not members of the Berne Union, might adhere. This effort, learning wisdom from previous efforts, has proceeded with utmost care to assure that in this country all interested parties were represented in preliminary discussions. The Copyright Office, the Department of State, the copyright bar, the book publishers, the periodical publishers, the motion picture pro ducers, the radio and television interests, the music interests, the learned societies and scientific groups, and-last but not least-the authors and composers themselves, have all been involved in the discussions carried on in this country for 4 years prior to the drafting of the Universal Copyright Convention, and the convening of the diplomatic conference in Geneva in 1952. There-largely through American leadership-a text was formulated embodying the best concepts of American and European practice, and making possible the extension of copyright benefits and protection to less developed countries where such benefits and protection have never yet reached, and providing a formula which all may accept withotu loss of rights or prestige. With that brief history behind us, let me summarize the pros and cons of the Universal Copyright Convention. ADVANTAGES OF CONVENTION The advantages are: 1. As a matter of simple economics the products of the minds of United States authors will achieve for the first time an effective international protection throughout most of the Western World, not merely by courtesy as in the "side door" to Berne, but as a matter of right. In the field of books and motion pictures alone this involves a not inconsiderable figure-United States book exports presently amount to approximately $25 million a year, and the receipts from motion picture film rentals outside the United States run in the neighborhood of $200 million a year. 2. We gain enormously in convenience, eliminating the necessity for securing separate copyright protection in each of the other countries of the world. Let me give you an example. In 1905 we negotiated a copyright treaty with Japan. This treaty has always been completely unsatisfactory to American copyright proprietors because of its lack of protection of translation rights. At the end of the last war we let this treaty lapse and, after protracted and difficult negotiations, effected a new arrangement-which now has only 2 years to run. Unless the Universal Copyright Convention comes into being, we shall have to renew the ordeal of separate negotiation or go without any reciprocal protection between the two countries. As you might expect, the injury in that case will be much greater to American economic interests than to the Japanese, and could prove seriously harmful in important public opinion-making circles. 3. We will add to the abilities of American authors, publishers and other producers to give to the rest of the world the results of American thought, science and technology. As you know, it is the declared objective of the Congress of the United States that a better understanding of the United States be promoted in foreign countries (22 U. S. C. 1431). For this purpose, United States information libraries in foreign countries, as well as many other related activities, have been established; but a principal method of promoting such understanding is through the commercially distributed products of book and periodical publishers, motion picture producers, etc. Foreign countries are anxious to secure these products and an improved international copyright agreement will assist this desirable |