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.

442 these loans are a source of discontent to both borrowers and lenders. The borrower usually pays a handling fee to the archive but also pays the standard rental fee to the studio (or distributor), notwithstanding the source of the print. Archivists are wary of approving many such loans (and those to only well-established nonprofit exhibitors and festivals), primarily because they have insufficient funds to replace film materials, should damage occur. Public archives would prefer that commercially owned films be available through commercial distributors but are willing to fill the gap in special circumstances. Task force members have endorsed the principle that archives should charge a handling fee for the loan of prints of commercially owned titles that are unavailable from other sources. In these cases, the handling fee is paid to the archive to help offset print maintenance, loan and replacement costs. Fee-sharing for commercially out-ofprint titles has been pioneered by the Universal City Studios in loans from the UCLA Film and Television Archive to the Stanford Theatre. The National Film Preservation Board will work to promote this feesharing approach for rare, commercially unavailable prints and stimulate discussions to extend the Universal-UCLA-Stanford Theatre model. Recommendation 4.4: Print Banks Expand nonprofit distribution of archival exhibition prints, particularly of public domain titles, through centralized "print banks." In addition to the commercially owned titles discussed above, there is need to improve the print availability of public domain films, especially those older than 75 years (generally the maximum term of U.S. copyright). Many older public domain titles are distributed in poor duplicate prints that do little Justice to their originals. Nonprofit print banks can serve as an expanded distribution node for good-quality 35mm prints of public domain films preserved in public archives. Print banks might also handle selected copyrighted films designated by rightsholders. The National Film Preservation Board will explore a range of implementation options, including the creation of a new service with the cooperation of U.S. archives and the expansion of 35mm loans through the Museum of Modem Art's Circulating Film Library. Recommendation 4.5: 16mm Film Promote the continued availability of certain categories of unique 16mm film. Although there is a widespread sense that 16mm film is a dying format-replaced in the classroom and elsewhere by videotape and videodisc-the 16mm gauge deserves continued support in certain cases. One important distinction is between 16mm reduction copies of 35mm films and works created on 16mm, including most postwar documentaries, home-movies from the 1920s through the 1940s, and 14 Redefining Film Preservation