Copyright term, film labeling, and film preservation legislation : hearings before the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 989, H.R. 1248, and H.R. 1734 ... June 1 and July 13, 1995 (1996)

101 \ Mr. Becerra. I am hearing that I shouldn't worry about something that affects your membership. You are telHng me that you are OK with the way it is. You wouldn't rather see the legislation amended to, say, 76 years versus 56 years. Mr. KOENIGSBERG. That is exactly right. Congressman. I can tell you and Ms. Bergman, as a member of ASCAP's board can confirm, that ASCAP's board, who are songwriters and music publishers, ASCAP's board voted a resolution that said that this bill, the bill that Congressman Moorhead has introduced and that you all have cosponsored, is the bill that ASCAP supports. Mr. Becerra. Was there any dissension or discord among the songwriters or the authors within ASCAP? Mr. KOENIGSBERG. There was a great deal of discussion by both the writers and the publishers. It doesn't just go one way or the other, as Mr. Murphy has pointed out. But the conclusion of ASCAP's members was that this was the bill that they were supporting. Mr. Becerra. Thank you. Let me yield to my colleague. Mr. Bono. Thank you. You raise an excellent point, and it is a classic case of legal knowledge and very little knowledge about legalities. And what can easily happen is what you are talking about, is that a nonlegal mind can just go on with life and suddenly realize they should have done something. Not everybody — excuse me, not everybody gets the data that the lawyer is conveying to you. Not every songwriter — and, again, bear in mind a lot of these guys are kids. They are brilliant, but they are kids who go on with life and forget about these things. So it is a strange situation. And I think this — I think your point is very well taken. I think at the point of transition that the songwriter could be informed that they have rights or should have an opportunity at the point of transition, but on the one hand you are doing the songwriter a tremendous favor. You are letting some guy maybe in the south who wrote three songs and they hit be a source of income for him for his annuity all his life, so that is wonderful. But, on the other hand, like you say, this other scenario could get played out; and he could blow billions. So, you know, I think it is only fair that there is some effort made to inform them of this situation. In most cases, probably 99 percent of the cases, the songwriter would say, great, we want the extra time — I know I would — and probably would not grumble about that. But it is an excellent point, and that occurs. The publishers have a battalion of attorneys. The songwriter has none. Mr. Becerra. I thank the gentleman for his insightful comments, and I will yield to my other colleague from California. Mr. Berman. I understand the songwriter who decided to continue the publisher, not terminate the publisher and continue him for 19 more years, probably would make the exact same decision if it was 39 more years. I mean, it is hard to understand the situation where he would not make that extension. It is the flip side that I am wondering about in terms of the publishers. This reminds me of one of my less successful entries in the