1 2 3 4 5 6 45 (c) The table of sections for chapter 1 of title 17 of the United States Code is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 118 the following: "119. Limitation on liability: Video recording. "120. Limitation on liability: Audio recording. (d) The table of sections for chapter 5 of title 17 of the United States Code is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 510, the following: "511. Additional remedy for infringing importation or manufacture, and distribution, of audio or video recording devices and media.". O To amend title 17 of the United States Code to exempt the private noncommercial recording of copyrighted works on video recorders from copyright infringement. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 25), 1983 Mr. DECONCINI (for himself and Mr. THURMOND) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary A BILL To amend title 17 of the United States Code to exempt the private noncommercial recording of copyrighted works on video recorders from copyright infringement. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That chapter 1 of title 17 of the United States Code is 4 amended by inserting at the end thereof the following new 5 section: 2 1 "8119. Limitation on exclusive rights: Exemption for cer 3 "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not 4 an infringement of copyright for an individual to record copy 5 righted works on a video recorder if 9 "(1) the recording is made for a private use; and "(2) the recording is not used in a commercial nature.”. SEC. 2. The table of sections for chapter 1 of title 17 of 10 the United States Code is amended by inserting after the 11 item relating to section 118 the following: "119. Limitation on exclusive rights: Exemption for certain video recordings.". Senator MATHIAS. I would say that due to the constraints of time, we will impose a 5-minute limit for oral summaries of the witnesses' testimony, but the prepared statements will appear in full in the record, as is customary. We will keep the record open for 4 weeks for additional submissions and for answers to any questions that may be submitted by Senators for witnesses. Senator DeConcini. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DENNIS DeCONCINI Senator DECONCINI. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Our committee is meeting once again to hear testimony suggesting how Congress should best react to ever increasingly fast-paced changes in technology. The issue we address again today is how, if at all, our copyright laws should affect the individual recording of copyrighted material. One of the bills under consideration today, as the chairman mentioned, is S. 175, introduced by Chairman Thurmond and myself. S. 175 would amend the Copyright Act to exempt from any possible liability the individual who purchases or has already purchased a video cassette recorder for the purpose of recording television programs off the air in order to schedule his or her television viewing at a personally convenient time. S. 175 would not allow these recordings to be used commercially. By exempting noncommercial home recordings from the effects of the Copyright Act, Congress would be clearly defining the boundaries of applicability of that particular law. At present the differing court interpretations of the act place consumers and manufacturers at a very high potential risk. Extensive hearings were held in the Judiciary Committee during the 97th Congress on this particular issue. The committee heard from knowledgeable witnesses representing the parties interested in this legislation. Mr. Chairman, you have assembled an impressive array of witnesses again this year. I hope that they are prepared to offer additional insights on the subject today. Consensus of the diverse groups of witnesses we heard last year was that Congress should act to exempt potential liability to the individual user of a video recorder. The only issue remaining to be resolved, therefore, is whether the exemption should be accompanied by a royalty tax on blank tapes and/or video recorders. The related question of how audio recording should be treated is covered by the chairman's proposed legislation. It would also establish a new royalty tax on blank tapes and/or machines by simultaneously removing any potential liability from the individual. Congress must decide whether this is an appropriate way to proceed, balancing the interests of the consumer and those of the producers of copyrighted material. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling these hearings. I know you have burdensome time constraints because you are also chairman of the Rules Committee. I appreciate your willingness to proceed with hearings and I hope marking up both of these pieces of legislation. Senator MATHIAS. Thank you, Senator DeConcini. I appreciate your comments. I hope you will not take it amiss if I take exception to the use of the word tax in your statement, however. If it were a tax, this would be a matter for Senator Dole to consider in the Finance Committee. This is a royalty used to compensate creative artists and authors and others who contribute to the production of these copyrighted works. It is, of course, a matter of some interest; this is not a unique American problem. It is a problem which plagues the creative artists, those who produce intellectual property in every country in the world. And we are pleased this morning to have as visitors in the committee Government officials from Great Britain, from France, from the Federal Republic of Germany, from Austria, from Canada, from Australia, from Switzerland, and from Sweden. And I want to welcome them to the hearing today and suggest that if in any one of those countries they have found the answer to this vexing and difficult problem, that we will give them as much time as they want in the witness stand. Meanwhile, we want to welcome one of our favorite witnesses, Mr. David Ladd. STATEMENT OF DAVID LADD, REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, ACCOMPANIED BY DOROTHY SCHRADER, GENERAL COUNSEL AND ASSOCIATE REGISTER FOR LEGAL AFFAIRS; DAVID E. LEIBOWITZ, POLICY PLANNING ADVISER; AND MARILYN KRETSINGER, SENIOR ATTORNEY ADVISER Mr. LADD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator DeConcini, for inviting us again to express the views of the Copyright Office on this very important issue of home taping. Briefly, I would like to introduce Dorothy Schrader, Marilyn Kretsinger, and David Leibowitz, all of whom have been before this subcommittee before. As you have observed, Mr. Chairman, the Judiciary Committee has held hearings on this issue before, and we testified before them in April of last year. It is unlikely that you will hear arguments in these hearings different in kind from those which have been presented before; but there have been important changes within the industries and the proposed legislation since we were here before, and I will refer to those later in the testimony. The Copyright Office recommends that Congress act on this issue regardless of the outcome, or the timing of the outcome, of the Betamax litigation now in the Supreme Court; if the Court affirms the judgment appealed from in the Betamax case, there will be difficulty in shaping an appropriate decree and a virtual impossibility of binding all parties concerned. If, on the other hand, the Court reverses the judgment, the issue will remain whether the Congress should modify this decision by imposing a levy system as proposed in S. 31. Mr. Chairman, within recent weeks, you have made a public statement, and I quote, "It would be wrong to pit the copyright owners against the public in a simplistic way. The public's interest lies on both sides of the equation.' |