Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

NEW YORK, N.Y., August 13, 1973.
THOMAS C. BRENNAN,
Chief Counsel,
old Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR Tom: You may recall that Senator McClellan asked me to submit the
letters of support which I read from as part of my presentation on August 1st.
May I enclosed copies of said letters for inclusion in the Record. If you need
additional copies, please let me know.
Sincerely,

ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO, Counsel.

HARRY Fox AGENCY, INC.,

New York, N.Y., July 29, 1973.
ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO, Esq.,
Sesac, Inc., New York, N.Y.

DEAR MR. CIANCIMINO: We agree with the position taken by Sesac that inclu-
sion of Section 112(c) in S. 1361 would be detrimental and contrary to the legiti-
mate interests of publishers and authors.
Sincerely,

ALBERT BERMAN.

NATIONAL MUSIC PUBLISHERS' ASSOCIATION, INC.,

New York, N.Y., Fuly 29, 1973.
ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO, Esq.,
Sesac, Inc., New York, N.Y.

DEAR MR. CIANCIMINO: The National Music Publishers' Association agrees with the position taken by Sesac concerning Section 112(c) of S. 1361.

We have read your statement to be presented before the Senate Sub-Committee on Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights on August 1, 1973. Undoubtedly because of the necessary brevity of the statement, other significant and relevant material has not been included. Therefore, we shall ask permission of the SubCommittee to submit a statement dealing with certain additional important points and problems involved. Sincerely,

LEONARD FEIST,

MUSIC PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

New York, N.Y., April 17, 1973.
Mr. ALBERT CIANCIMINO,
Sesac, Inc.,
New York, N.Y.

DEAR AL: At a Board Meeting of this association on April 11, the following resolution was passed unanimously :

Resolved, That MPA supports SESAC in its efforts to eliminate the proposed exemption for the making of copies of tapes of religious broadcasts."

Would you kindly keep me up-to-date as to your efforts and also send me copies of any statements or documentation relating to your efforts which may be available.

For your information enclosed is a statement I submitted respecting Section
108(d).
Kindest regards.
Sincerely,

PHILIP B. WATTENBERG.

CHURCH MUSIC PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION,

July 24, 1973.
Mr. ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO,
Sesac,
New York, N.Y.

DEAR MR. CIANCIMINO: This letter is to certify that the Church Music Pub-
lishers Association heartily endorses the position of Mr. Albert F. Ciancimino
on the total deletion of Section 112C of the Bill S1361.
Cordially yours,

STEVEN R. LORENZ, President.

[ocr errors]

BROADCAST MUSIC INC.,

New York, N.Y., July 25, 1973.
ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO, Esq.,
Sesac Inc.,
New York, N.Y.

DEAR AL: Although the supporters of proposed section 112(c) are undoubtedly
well-intentioned, it is readily apparent that they have not studied the existing
Copyright Law, its history, or the proposed revision in its entirety. Clearly, there
is no justification for the imposition of those limitations contained in Section
112(c).
Sincerely,

EDWARD M. CRAMER.
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS & PUBLISHERS,

New York, N.Y., July 25, 1973.
ALBERT F. CIANCIMINO, Esq.,
Sesac, Inc.,
New York, N.Y.

DEAR MR. CIANCIMINO: I have been authorized by the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers on behalf of its members to advise you that they join the writers and publishers of religious works whom you represent in opposing enactment of g 112(c) of S. 1361.

That provision, if enacted, would create a new exemption previously unknown to the copyright law. It would exempt the unauthorized manufacture and distribution of recordings of performances of works of a religious nature for use by organizations having a license to perform the work. Organizations such as ASCAP make their entire repertory available at very little cost to organizations that have very little commercial income. If these performance licenses must carry with them an involuntary recording license with respect to works of a religious nature, it would be necessary to increase the performance license fees to make up for an invasion of the recording right. Thus, one who is not interested in obtaining recording rights would have to pay for a privilege desired by someone else. This is contrary to the entire spirit of the copyright law which expressly provides for a separation of rights. It would be contrary to the public interest because the public would suffer by discouraging writers and publishers of religious works from making those works generally available at modest rates. There is no reason for exempting recording manufacturers merely because they do not seek a profit. They pay for electricity, telephones and other services; they certainly should pay the composers of religious works.

In sum, it is submitted that enactment of $ 112(c) would be contrary to the public interest as set forth in the Constitution, which empowers Congress to promote that interest by securing to authors the exclusive right to their writings (U.S. Cons., Art. I, § 8). To the extent that compulsory recording licenses are believed appropriate, there is ample safeguard in Section 115 of S. 1361. That provides for a nominal payment with respect to works of which phonorecords have been distributed to the public under the authority of the copyright owner. No further invasion of the authors' exclusive rights should be permitted. Sincerely,

HERMAN FINKELSTEIN,

General Counsel.
BARKSDALE, WHALLEY, LEAVER, GILBERT & FRANK,

Nashville, Tenn., July 23, 1973.
Re Senate hearings of August 1, 1973–National religious broadcasters copy-

right exemption. Mr. AL CIANCIMINO, Sesac, Inc., New York, N.Y.

DEAR AL: As attorney for the International Gospel Music Publishers Association, I wish to go on record on behalf of the Association as being emphatically opposed to any copyright revision granting religious broadcasters any exemption from the paying of performance or mechanical rights pursuant to the Copyright Act of the Untied States. Specifically, we are opposed to the proposed copyright amendments contained in Senate Bill 644. $$ 112-B and 112-C.

Please find enclosed a resolution adopted by the International Gospel Music Publishers Association in January of 1973. Also please find enclosed a listing of

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

the membership and sympathizers of the Association, representing substantially every aspect of gospel and sacred music industry throughout the United States.

The approach of the National Religious Broadcasters is an unwarranted attack upon the copyright citadel of the United States, wholly unjustifiable, without merit, and an erosion of the property rights of copyright holders. Very truly yours,

R. DAVID LUDWICK.

RESOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL GOSPEL MUSIC PUBLISHERS' ASSOCIATION

OPPOSING PROPOSED $ 112B AND $ 112C, AMENDMENTS TO COPYRIGHT ACT Whereas an amendment to the Copyright Act has been proposed in Senate Bill S644, $$ 112B and 112C, which seeks to grant to the "Government” and non-profit organizations an exemption from payment of fees for mechanical reproduction of "sacred" musical works; and

Whereas International Gospel Music Publishers' Association consists of publishers of musical works of gospel and sacred nature devoted to the dissemination of religious messages; and such publishers have a duty to protect the copyrights on such musical works for the benefit of the composers against infringement of copyrights and to collect from all users of such works the fees required by the Federal Copyright Act for mechanical reproduction of such copyrighted works and to pay the composers their prorata shares of such fees; and

Whereas such musical works constitute literary property protected under the Copyright Act by a requirement for payment of fees as compensation for compulsory licensing of usage of such musical works for mechanical reproduction thereof; and such statutory protection constitutes a valuable property right of the composers and publishers of such copyrighted works; and

Whereas the proposed statutory exemption from payment of fees for mechanical reproduction of such works by the "government" and non-profit organizations would constitute an unconstitutional taking of valuable property rights without condemnation proceedings and without due process of law; and

Whereas no reasonable basis exists for a special classification of "sacred" musical works distinct from any other musical works; and

Whereas the proposed amendment exempting “sacred” musical works contains no standard from which a determination may be made as to which musical works are classified as "sacred" musical works; hence such statutory exemption of “sacred" musical works is too indefinite and uncertain to constitute a valid legislative enactment; and

Whereas the proposed amendment exempting "sacred” musical works contains no definition of the nature or limitation of usage to be made by the “government" or non-profit organizations in such mechanical reproductions of such musical works and hence such statutory exemption is too indefinite and uncertain to constitute a valid legislative enactment capable of any practical application to any particular works or any certain usage by such mechanical reproductions: Now, therefore, it is hereby

Resowed, That the Internation Gospel Music Publishers' Association is opposed to the adoption of such amendment to the revision of the Copyright Act, and is specifically opposed to the adoption of $ 112B and 112C as contained in Senate Bill S644 for the proposed revision of Copyright Act; be it further

Resolved, That a copy of this resolution unanimously adopted at the meeting of International Gospel Music Publishers' Association in Washington, D.C. on January 30, 1973, be recorded as part of the minutes of said meeting; and

Resolved further, That copies of this resolution be mailed to the members of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights of the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate, and to Thomas C. Brannan, Chief Counsel, United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights, Washington. D.C. 20510, and to Miss Barbara Ringer, Assistant Register of Copyrights, Copyright Office, The Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540. Beasley and Barker, Les Beasley, Pensacola, Florida. John T. Benson Publishing Co., John T. Benson III, Nashville, Tennessee. Blackwood-Marshall Music, Inc., The Blackwood, Nashville, Tennessee. Cedarwood Music Publishing Co., Bill Denney, Nashville, Tennessee. Eternal Music Co., George Younce, Stow, Ohio. Faith Music Co., Don Butler, Atlanta, Georgia. Gaither Music Co., Bill Gaither, Alexandria, Indiana.

Gospel Quartet Music Co., J. D. Sumner, Nashville, Tennessee.
Hamblen Music Co., Stuart Hamblen, Universal City, California.
Harvestime, Henry Slaughter, Nashville, Tennessee.
Journey Music Co., Roy Conley, Madisonville, Kentucky.
LeFevre-Sing, Jimmy Jones.
Albert Brumley Co., Albert Brumley, Powell, Missouri.
Iillenas Publishing Co., Albert Brumley, Powell, Missouri.
Manna Music Co., Hal Spencer, North Hollywood, California.
Mark IV Music, Inc., Fred Daniel, Spartanburg, South Carolina.
Nashville Gospel, Lou Hildreth, Nashville, Tennessee.
Rambo Music Co., Buck Rambo, Nashville, Tennessee.
Silverline Music Co., Duane Allen, Nashville, Tennessee.
Singspiration, P. J. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Ben Speer Music Co., Ben Speer, Nashville, Tennessee.
Tennessee Music and Printing Co., Connor B. Hall, Cleveland, Tennessee.
Thrasher Bros., Jim Thrasher, Birmingham, Alabama.
Word, Inc., Billy Ray Hearn.

Senator McCLELLAN. Call the next witness.
Mr. BRENNAN. The National Religious Broadcasters.

Dr. NELSON. Yes, my name is Wilbur E. Nelson. I live in Long Beach, Calif., and I am accompanied by Mr. John Midlen, counsel for National Religious Broadcasters, and Dr. Ben Armstrong, executive secretary of National Religious Broadcasters.

Senator McCLELLAN. All right, Dr. Nelson, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF REV. DR. WILBUR E. NELSON, SECRETARY, NA

TIONAL RELIGIOUS BROADCASTERS; ACCOMPANIED BY: JOHN H. MIDLEN, COUNSEL; AND DR. BEN ARMSTRONG, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL RELIGIOUS BROADCASTERS

Dr. Nelson. I am an ordained minister of the Evangelical Free Church. I am the minister and director of the Morning Chapel Hour. And incidentally, I am a composer of religious music under contract of Zondervan, an inspirational music publishing company.

I present this testimony as secretary of National Religious Broadcasters and as chairman of its copyright committee concerning section 112(c) of S. 1361.

National Religious Broadcasters-NRB—is a nonprofit association formed in 1944 in order to contribute to the improvement of religious broadcasts, better to serve the public interest, and more effectively to minister to the spiritual welfare of this Nation. The association has approximately 550 members organizations distributed among the 50 States of the United States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

The membership of National Religious Broadcasters consists of: first, broadcast station licensees and their associates; second, performing artists and others related to broadcasting; and third, those producing religious programs for broadcast stations. There are more than 425 organizations, including those who are not NRB members, which produce religious programs on a nonprofit basis for presentation on a number of broadcast stations.

Additionally, it is conservatively estimated there are more than 1,500 pastors and rabbis having individual programs on local broadcast outlets.

Among the more widely known religious programs produced by NRB members for broadcasting are Billy Graham's Hour of Decision, The Lutheran Hour, The Baptist Hour, Methodist Hour, Back to the Bible, Light and Life Hour (Free Methodist), Revivaltime (Assemblies of God), Morning Chapel Hour, Herald of Truth (of the Church of Christ), and many, many others.

Other religious programs utilizing religious music and having extensive broadcast dissemination include the Hour of St. Francis, Ave Maria Hour, Sacred Heart Hour, The Protestant Hour, Voice of Prophecy of the Seventh-Day Adventist, Lamp Unto My Feet (ecumenical), Jewish Dimension, The Eternal Light, and Jewish Community Hour.

These and practically all religious program producers are vitally concerned that there be enacted to the present provisions of section 112(c) of the pending S. 1361 for general revision of the copyriglit Jaw clarifying the right of nonprofit organizations under certain circumstances to make for distribution to licensed transmitting organizations phonorecordings of religious music for usage in religious programs.

The religious music used in religious programs creates an appropriate devotional mood as well as serves as a musical bridge between the spoken words with the degree of usage of religious music varying from program to program. The format for the various religious programs differs, of course, in degree, but the production and distribution principles are relatively uniform.

The programs are produced either on tape or disc for distribution by mail of one copy only to each broadcast station carrying the program. The programs then are broadcast at the time and day agreed upon between the station and the program producer. None of these programs is produced for profit by the religious producers.

In fact, the religious program producer usually pays the broadcast station to carry the program or furnishes the religious program without charge to the broadcast outlet. The broadcast stations customarily have performance, rights licenses covering this religious music with ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. NRB supports the rights of the copyright owners to compensation for performances of religious music under these performance rights licenses with the broadcast outlets. NRB also supports the rights of the copyright owners to compensation for mechanical reproductions of religious music made for sale or other profit.

There presently exists confusion and contradiction with respect to claims for mechanical reproduction fees for musical works of a religious nature included in religious programs produced by nonprofit organizations for broadcasting purposes. Religious program producers have reported no problems in this respect with ASCAP or BMI.

Only SESAC, according to frequent reports, has pressured certain of the religious program producers to make such payments. Further, there is a basic division in the ranks among Gospel or religious music publishers with some seeking to assert mechanical reproduction claims and others considering that they are not appropriate.

Any law requiring or leaving open the possibility that mechanical reproduction fees be paid for such use could make this music too expensive in the average religious broadcast since the financial resources of these program producers are not adequate to accommodate such cost as documented by an NRB study. In this study, National

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »