Senator BURDICK. In other words, the artists who perform the work would get two royalties? Mr. KENTON. He would get a royalty on the sale of the record and, much more important to him, he would get the performance royalty Senator BURDICK. Both royalties, they are based on performance of that record? Mr. KENTON. No; the royalty he gets from the recording company is based on the sale of the record. Senator BURDICK. That is right; one based on the sale of the record, the other based on the income from the record? Mr. KENTON. The performance of the record; yes, sir. Senator BURDICK. I think I understand your position Mr. Kenton. I appreciate very much, and the committee does, too, this contribution. Mr. KENTON. Thank you. Senator BURDICK. That concludes the testimony for today. The hearings will be resumed on April 4, at 10 a.m. in room 2228. The committee will stand in recess. (Whereupon, at 2:30 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene on Tuesday, April 4, 1967, at 10 a.m. in room 2228.) COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 2228, New Senate Office Building, Senator Quentin Burdick presiding. Present: Senators Burdick, McClellan (chairman of the subcommittee), and Fong. Also present: Thomas C. Brennan, chief counsel; Edd N. Williams, Jr., assistant counsel; Stephen G. Haaser, chief clerk, Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights; and Horace L. Flurry, representing Senator Philip A. Hart. Senator BURDICK. The first witness will be Mr. W. Brown Morton, Jr., who will be presented by our colleague, Senator Spong. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM B. SPONG, JR., A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA Senator SPONG. Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege this morning to present to this subcommittee Mr. W. Brown Morton, Jr. Mr. Morton is a member of the Virginia bar, the District of Columbia bar, and the bar of the State of New York. He is a resident of Alexandria, Va., and a lecturer at the University of Virginia. I am sure that the testimony that he and his colleagues will present to you this morning relative to S. 597 will be of help and of interest to this subcommittee. Senator BURDICK. Thank you, Senator. STATEMENT OF W. BROWN MORTON, JR., INTERUNIVERSITY COM- Mr. MORTON. Mr. Chairman, as Senator Spong has said, my name is W. Brown Morton, Jr. I am here as leadoff witness for Educom. The University of Virginia is one of the founding members of Educom, which is more formally known as the Interuniversity Communications Council. Senator BURDICK. In other words, the artists who perform the work would get two royalties? Mr. KENTON. He would get a royalty on the sale of the record and, much more important to him, he would get the performance royalty Senator BURDICK. Both royalties, they are based on performance of that record? Mr. KENTON. No; the royalty he gets from the recording company is based on the sale of the record. Senator BURDICK. That is right; one based on the sale of the record, the other based on the income from the record? Mr. KENTON. The performance of the record; yes, sir. Senator BURDICK. I think I understand your position Mr. Kenton. I appreciate very much, and the committee does, too, this contribution. Mr. KENTON. Thank you. Senator BURDICK. That concludes the testimony for today. The hearings will be resumed on April 4, at 10 a.m. in room 2228. The committee will stand in recess. (Whereupon, at 2:30 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene on Tuesday, April 4, 1967, at 10 a.m. in room 2228.) COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 2228, New Senate Office Building, Senator Quentin Burdick presiding. Present: Senators Burdick, McClellan (chairman of the subcommittee), and Fong. Also present: Thomas C. Brennan, chief counsel; Edd N. Williams, Jr., assistant counsel; Stephen G. Haaser, chief clerk, Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights; and Horace L. Flurry, representing Senator Philip A. Hart. Senator BURDICK. The first witness will be Mr. W. Brown Morton, Jr., who will be presented by our colleague, Senator Spong. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM B. SPONG, JR., A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA Senator SPONG. Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege this morning to present to this subcommittee Mr. W. Brown Morton, Jr. Mr. Morton is a member of the Virginia bar, the District of Columbia bar, and the bar of the State of New York. He is a resident of Alexandria, Va., and a lecturer at the University of Virginia. I am sure that the testimony that he and his colleagues will present to you this morning relative to S. 597 will be of help and of interest to this subcommittee. Senator BURDICK. Thank you, Senator. Mr. Morton, will you proceed, please? STATEMENT OF W. BROWN MORTON, JR., INTERUNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL; ACCOMPANIED BY EDISON MONTGOMERY, ASSISTANT TO THE CHANCELLOR FOR PLANNING, UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH, AND PRESIDENT OF EDUCOM; DR. JAMES G. MILLER, ACADEMIC VICE PRESIDENT, CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY, AND PRINCIPAL SCIENTIST FOR EDUCOM; PROF. ARTHUR R. MILLER, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL AND COCHAIRMAN, EDUCOM TASK FORCE ON LEGAL AND RELATED MATTERS Mr. MORTON. Mr. Chairman, as Senator Spong has said, my name is W. Brown Morton, Jr. I am here as leadoff witness for Educom. The University of Virginia is one of the founding members of Educom, which is more formally known as the Interuniversity Communications Council. Senator BURDICK. Do you want to make this entire statement a part of the record? Mr. MORTON. It seems to me the best way to handle it is to make that entire statement a part of the record and we will endeavor to compress and shorten and highlight that, and then answer any questions which may be presented to us by you. Senator BURDICK. Your statement will be made part of the record. Mr. MORTON. Thank you. My role is to represent the University of Virginia on a task force or subcommittee, if you like, of Educom, which is devoted to legal matters. The purpose of Educom is best expressed by simply saying to make sure that the higher education facilities of this country make the maximum use of computer or, more accurately, data information retrieval systems, data processing systems, for the advancement of higher education. The legal matters involved include obviously and importantly, though by no mean only copyright. It is because of our interest in copyright and the possible effects, nay, the certain effects of copyright law on the computer in its role in higher education that we are here. I have with me, and I would ask the Senator to hear them explain better than I the background of Educom, several people. I would like to present, on my left, Edison Montgomery, president of Educom. On my extreme right, Dr. James G. Miller, now academic vice president of Cleveland State University, and also vice president and principal scientist for Educom. And on my immediate right, Prof. Arthur R. Miller, of the University of Michigan Law School, who teaches copyright law and is cochairman of the Educom legal task force I spoke of. I would like to have Mr. Montgomery, who is president of Educom, explain briefly to the subcommitte just what Educom is and what its interest is in the subject matter here under discussion this morning. Senator BURDICK. Very well, Mr. Montgomery. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Educom was formed less than 2 years ago by men from eight universities. It was established to be a consortium of accredited institutions of higher education in the United States and Canada. It was formed by these representatives from eight universities with the conviction that technology, the computer, and other kinds of technology offers a way which never before has existed for institutions of higher education to share their resources. This conviction was based on a further conviction that unless we could share the resources among our colleges and universities-and by resources, I mean human talent, library resources, equipment-that the Nation could not and indeed should not afford the expansion that is ahead of us in higher education and at the same time maintain any acceptable level of quality. Secondly, we have the conviction that technology offers entirely new ways of teaching and of learning which may improve the instructional process, especially in the situation which is ahead of us, where we are going to have to teach many more students with insufficient numbers of instructors. Third, our conviction was that the rapid expansion of informationof which I am sure this committee has heard much in recent weeks |