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)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

402 3. The Limits of Cultural Policy If, after further study. Congress opted to combine a prolongation of the basic life-plus-fifty tern with a strengthened right of termination, as outlined above, it should consider further undertaking to clarify the frontier between copyright law and other intellectual property laws, with a view to limiting trade distortions in the general products market. Nhile this opens a topic that this statement cannot deeply cover, there are two closely related phenomena that require attention in this regard. One is a short-term need to reinforce the crumbling line of demarcation that historically separated artistic from industrial property, pending the formulation of new approaches to the protection of borderline subject matters that fit imperfectly within the classical patent and copyright paradigms. The other is the long-term need to develop such new approaches, in order to reduce the pressure on the world's intellectual property system while elevating the level of investment in routine, subpatentable innovations generally.^ Fortunately, the federal appellate courts have facilitated the first task by re invigorating the rule of Baker v. Selden"* as a barrier to copyright protection for functionally dictated '° See generally. Legal Hybrids, supra note 4, at 25002557; see also Collapse of the Patent-Copvright Dichotomy. bUBTA note 4, at 504-19 ("Empirical Limits of the Classical Bipolar Structure") . '« Baker v. Selden. 101 U.S. 99 (1879).