Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

Senator MCCLALLAN. Yes.

Mr. DAIMOND. And it is the limitation of copyright which is the principle we oppose.

Senator MCCLELLAN. The principle which is observed here and enacted in section 601, you oppose.

Mr. DIAMOND. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. All right, now. Let us see about the next

one.

Mr. DIAMOND. The next one is "recognition of a certificate of registration as constituting prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright."

This relates to section 409 (c) of the bill, Mr. Chairman. This would require, if it were to be followed by your committee, a relatively minor change.

Senator MCCLELLAN. In that, you are sugegsting just a minor change?

Mr. DIAMOND. Yes. And in this case I could be very specific if you wished.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Very well.

Mr. DIAMOND. Because in 409 (c), it says:

In an judicial proceedings the certificate of a registration made before or within five years after the first publication of the work shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the certificate.

The effect of the American Bar association opposition is simply to eliminate the words "of the copyright and", so that the certificate would be prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the certificate but would no be prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright itself.

In that regard may I say, Mr. Chairman, that our resolution is in acocrdance with the provisions of the present statute, the one which is now in effect.

Senator MCCLELLAN. That is really technical, and therefore that is a matter that can be waived very easily?

Mr. DIAMOND. Yes. I think you will hear pros and cons on this later in the course of these hearings, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. What you would want is just prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the certificate, and nothing else? Mr. DIAMOND. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. But not of the validity of the copyright.
Mr. DIAMOND. That is exactly right, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. All right.

Is there anything further that you would wish to suggest, either of you?

Mr. DIAMOND. Not unless you have additional questions, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I do not believe I have now.

Has the other gentleman you spoke of arrived yet?

Mr. ТOOMEY. Apparently not, Mr. Chairman. He should be here at any time.

Senator MCCLELLAN. When he arrives, we shall be glad to hear his

statement.

Gentlemen, we thank you very much.

Mr. DIAMOND. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

May I just add one word by way of explanation. I know Mr. Schulman was scheduled with your permission to appear in his personal behalf and to submit a statement. I trust that you will arrange either to hear him or at least to receive his prepared statement when he does arrive.

Senator MCCLELLAN. We will do one or the other.

Mr. DIAMOND. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Are Mr. Wigren and Mr. Rosenfield here? STATEMENT OF HAROLD E. WIGREN AND HARRY ROSENFIELD, AD HOC COMMITTEE (OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS) ON COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION; ACCOMPANIED BY DR. CHARLES GOSNELL, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE OF COPYRIGHT ISSUES, AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION; AND EUGENE N. ALEINIKOFF, JOINT NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION-EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION STATIONS MUSIC AND COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE

Senator MCCLELLAN. Mr. Wigren, would you identify yourself, please.

Mr. WIGREN. Yes, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. And then Mr. Rosenfield, would you identify yourself.

Mr. WIGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am Harold E. Wigren. A panel of educational witnesses appears before you this morning and, I suppose, this afternoon, since some of them are not here. We had expected to be heard from at 2 o'clock today, so two or three of them are not here yet, but I shall be glad to identify those who are at the table. Senator MCCLELLAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator MCCLELLAN. All right, would you all identify yourselves. I think there are four witnesses before me here.

Mr. WIGREN. We are four of some six whom we had planned to have with us.

I am Harold E. Wigren, the chairman of the ad hoc committee on copyright law revision, a committee of educational organizations and institutions. I have been a teacher in the classroom in the public schools and also at the university level. I have been a librarian in the Houston public schools; mathematics instructor in the U.S. Air Force; training aids officer for the San Antonio Aviation Cadet Center; director of audiovisual education for the Houston, Tex., Independent School District for 14 years, during 3 of which I served also as supervisor of school libraries and 11 of which I served also as director of educational television and radio. For the past 4 years I have been serving as the educational television consultant for the National Education Association and as the associate director of the NEA's Division of Audiovisual Instructional Service.

Today I appear before you in my capacity as the elected chairman of the ad hoc committee on copyright law revision to present the committee's views on S. 1006.

I would like to present, at this panel table, Mr. Harry Rosenfield to my left. Mr. Rosenfield is one of the attorneys for the ad hoc committee and chairman of the attorneys' group.

On my right is Dr. Charles Gosnell, who is the librarian of the New York University Library and chairman of the American Library As sociation Copyright Committee, a distinguished librarian of America.

Then, there is Mr. Eugene Ñ. Aleinikoff, who is attorney for the Joint National Educational Television-Educational Television Stations Music & Copyright Committee, the chairman of the joint committee between the two groups. Mr. Aleinikoff is a prominent lawyer in the field of educational television.

We have two other witnesses on this panel who are not here at this time. One is Dr. Fred Siebert, dean of the College of Communications Arts, Michigan State University, and representing the American Council on Education. Dr. Siebert has not yet arrived, but I imagine he will be here for the afternoon session. Also, there is Dr. T. M. Stinnett, the assistant executive secretary for professional development and welfare of the National Education Association. He will be representing the NEA before this committee, and will be appearing this afternoon.

Mr. Chairman, perhaps I should say a word here about the ad hoc committee. It has 35 constituent members, all of whom have highly respected leadership roles in the total field of education. It is not often that educational groups appear with such a united front before committees of the Congress. It is not often that all of these groups with such diverse interests sit on the same side of the table in presenting education's needs and concerns on a piece of legislation of this importance to the teachers and the schoolchildren of this Nation. This is one of the most amazing examples of the ecumenical spirit in all educational history. The members of the ad hoc committee are as follows:

1. American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.

2. American Association of Junior Colleges.

3. American Association of School Administrators.

4. American Association of Teachers of Chinese Language and Culture.

5. American Association of Teachers of French.

6. American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese. 7. American Association of University Women.

8. American Council on Education.

9. American Educational Theatre Association, Inc.

10. Association for Childhood Education International.

11. Association for Higher Education.

12. College English Association.

13. Council of Chief State School Officers.

14. Department of Audiovisual Instruction, NEA.

15. Department of Classroom Teachers, NEA.

16. Department of Foreign Languages, NEA.

17. Department of Rural Education, NEA.

18. International Reading Association.

19. Midwest Program on Airborne Television Instruction, Inc. 20. Modern Language Association.

21. Music Educators National Conference.

22. Music Teachers National Association.

23. National Art Education Association.

24. National Association of Educational Broadcasters.

25. National Catholic Educational Association.

26. National Catholic Theater Conference.

27. National Catholic Welfare Conference.

28. National Commission on Professional Rights and Responsibilities, NEA.

29. National Council for the Social Studies.

30. National Council of Teachers of English.

31. National Education Association of the United States.

32. National Educational Television & Affiliated Stations. 33. National School Boards Association.

34. New Jersey Art Education Association.

35. Speech Association of America.

The ad hoc committee has authorized me to state that the position we present to you today on this legislation represents a consensus of the membership-and we would underline this-arrived at after 2 years of exploration and study by the committee members of the 1909 law, of the draft which followed the Register's 1961 report, of the bill presented in the last session of the Congress, and of the bill now before your committee, S. 1006. The ad hoc committee was formed in July 1963 at an exploratory conference called by the National Education Association to review education's stake in the various proposals which were under consideration. The committee has met monthly and often semimonthly-during the last 2 years in studying the legislation; it has held meetings with trade and textbooks publishers' groups, with authors' groups, and with music publishers; and it has had several conferences with the Register of Copyrights and his staff.

After each of these meetings the ad hoc committee has constantly reassessed its position and has even made certain modifications which it felt would be beneficial to all concerned. To be sure, there have been disagreements within the ad hoc committee, but these have been not because our position is too broad and sweeping but rather because it is not broad enough for some of the members, or because it does not emphasize certain points which some of the members feel need further emphasis.

The position we are advancing today is a basic minimum position on which a consensus was reached. Several of the members wanted to go beyond this and will so indicate in their individual testimony later before this committee. Therefore, we testify today not for the individual members of the ad hoc committee but rather for its consensus.

Following my testimony, other members of this group will be identifying themselves and will also be expressing their opinions in behalf of their own group, as a member of the committee or otherwise.

We have listed on page 4 of my statement education's concerns in copyright law revision. Our position might be summarized in this

manner:

1. A new copyright law is needed to replace the outmoded one which has been on the statutes since 1909. We strongly feel this way.

2. The new law should be written in such a way as to support creative teaching practices rather than inhibit them. This really is the crux of the matter. The new law should enable teachers to teach as well

as they know how to teach. It should further the national objectives, as expressed by both the President and the Congress, in maximizing the use of teaching and learning resources of all types in the education of all of our citizens, particularly those who are disadvantaged. 3. The new law should enable teachers to use the new educational technology, including educational television and radio, in their day-today teaching, with a minimum of delays and without additional payments for reasonable and limited use.

4. The new law should provide the same special recognition for education as has been granted in other laws enacted by the Congress. Teachers serve the public in a nonprofit enterprise. They use materials for the benefit of students and not for their own commercial gain.

5. The new law should continue to differentiate between commercial uses of copyrighted materials and nonprofit, noncommercial educational uses of such materials. We feel the proposed bill makes no such distinction. It equates commercial and noncommercial uses of copyrighted materials.

6. The new law should strike a sound balance between the rights of authors-publishers and the rights of consumers-users of materials. We are not asking for a user's bill. We feel, however, that the proposed law is weighted heavily on the side of the author-producer and has extended his rights immeasurably while further restricting the rights of the consumer-user. We are interested in obtaining a fair balance between the two.

7. The crucial point at stake here is the right to make limited-underline "limited"-copies or recordings of copyrighted works for nonprofit educational use by pupils and teachers without the need to obtain clearance and/or pay royalties. This would not include the copying of material from workbooks or answer sheets to standardized tests, which would be both a poor teaching practice and an infringement of copyright, in our estimation.

Let me say that we made this exception after a meeting with several of the publishers' groups. We felt this is where our position might hurt them the most, so we finally agreed that we would not ask for this, and we think this is perfectly fair.

When teachers expose learners to a wide range of materials, both in the classroom and on educational broadcasting, they create-in effectmarkets for the works of authors. The affluent state of the publishing industry today can be attributed in no small measure to the appetite for good reading which teachers have developed in students through the years.

Ad hoc committee's recommendations

Now, what is the ad hoc committee asking specifically?

At the conclusion of my testimony, Mr. Harry Rosenfield, a member of the legal subcommittee of the ad hoc committee, will present to you the specific recommendations and proposals which our ad hoc committee is making. The basic position of the ad hoc committee is that amendments to S. 1006 are needed before education can support the bill.

In capsule form, the ad hoc committee's position might be sunmarized as follows:

« PreviousContinue »