Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Thank you for a copy of your statement at the hearing of the Senate
Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on copyrights relating to S.1384 - the
bill which would reverse the Supreme Court's decision in the Mills Music
Case.

[blocks in formation]

6777 Hollywood Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90028 (213) 469-1667 Cable: SOUTHMUSIC TWX: 910 32/4098

[blocks in formation]

We heartily agree with the position you presented on behalf of music publishers at the November 20, 1985 hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on copyrights chaired by Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) relating to s.1384 - the Bill to legislatively reverse the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in the Mills Music Case.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

I read your statement on S.1384 with great interest, and congratulate
you for your lucid and honest presentation of the issue.
Because I have been on the front lines of the music business all my
adult life, I feel very involved with this issue. During the 1960s I
participated in the complex task of copyright revision, and as an
active publisher played a role in discussions that lead to several
major compromises necessary to get copyright revision accomplished.
It is still clear in my mind that a compromise was struck whereby
publishers would share in the 19 year extended term on derivative
rights. Once that compromise was struck, the matter of duration was
all settled. There was no reason for further debate, and that's why
the legislative proceedings contain so little on this vital issue.
This company has been in the hands of the same family since 1913 when
we were founded. Considering what we have contributed and created
over the years, I can only express amazement at anyone who would
describe us as "middlemen." Looked at very simply, a writer created a
song 56 years ago. We became a partner and worked on that song for 56
years (or 28 years if the partnership began during the renewal term).
No matter how much one glorifies the songwriter, no matter how
sympathetic one may be toward the person who works only with his mind,
I think that the writers are being greedy in asserting that it is
right to stop this partnership on all work that has been done in the
past, and that they are to get all of the money during the 19 year
extended tem. It is equitable to continue to share the fruits of
that partnership between the publisher and the writer. That is the
compromise that was made. The writer still gets reversions. They own
the copyright for the next 19 years, and whatever they create they
keep. In addition, they inherit the momentum of the song that was
built up through the publisher's efforts.
Ralph Oman, register of copyrights, points out in his statement
that there is a constitutional issue about the proposed bill.
Well, after the Supreme Court decision, I have more than "reasonable
expectation" to be paid on derivative works (which income my company
shares with the writers).

SHAPIRO. BERNSTEIN & CO. INC.

It

It is a brilliant accomplishment to write a hit song. As you and I
both know, it is also a brilliant accomplishment to be the publisher
of a hit song. It was our taste that discovered the song, that got it
rolling to begin with. It is our brains and creativity that got all
those records, printed all that music, got the song performed in films
and on television in connercials, etc. etc. which kept it alive.
is most difficult for me to accept the argument that we are not
entitled to share in what we have also created. Our creativity is
symbiotic with the writers' creativity. Without them we would have
nothing, without us they would have nothing.
By asserting that publishers should drop out completely during the
extended term, in effect you take away the publisher's incentive to
work on a song he is going to lose, say in five years. A publisher
might as well spend his money on something brand new or with many
years to run on the copyright. That kind of negative incentive seems
to be a strange way to help writers.
Sincerely?

ray
Leon Brettler
Executive Vice President

LB/reb

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

We support the position you presented on behalf of music
publishers at the November 20, 1985 hearing of the Senate
Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on copyrights chaired
by Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) relating to s.1384-the
Bill to legislatively reverse the U.S. Supreme Court's
opinion in the Mills Music Case.

Thank you very much for your efforts on behalf of this very important cause.

Sincerelth

Lesterin Presidents

LS:krc

HOLLYWOOD: 6255 SUNSET BOULEVARD. HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90028 (213) 468-3643
NEW YORK 157 W. 57TH STREET, SUITE 102, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019 (212) 581-7420

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »