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.
150
Mr. CONYERS. You need protection.
Mr. Bono. We need legislation.
Mr. Berman. I am not sure of the philosophical distinction between mandating the extension of the copyright term and the notion that it is inappropriate to mandate
Mr. Bono. May I respond to that?
Mr. Berman. Only if it is not on my time.
Mr. Bono. One is paid for and one isn't.
Mr. Berman. In other words, you are not talking about the song as a work for hire for a film. You are talking about an independent song.
Mr. Bono. That is true.
Mr. Berman. I think that is a fair distinction.
Mr. Eves, I don't think you should continue to use the argument that we — we in the sense of whoever all is in the coalition — the studios, the video dealers, the television stations, the networks — have out of the goodness of our heart and because it is a right thing to do come up with an appropriate label for these films.
The fact is, you did it because there was legislation in over the last 5 or 6 years and it was in that context that those labels appeared. And so already the legislation has had some role. It has caused you to decide to come to an agreement on a label.
To me, this is sort of a continuum. You start on the far end with should any of the creators be able to veto this, the noncopyright holder creators be able to veto this? Should they be able to object to it? Should it be accurately described?
I can certainly see your concern about disparaging comments affecting the marketability of the product. And I know that were negotiations. They came fairly close. I think the folks who have labeled— the studios and the people who have labeled — have fallen short of where they were in the negotiation process; and the other side in this legislation is asking for more. I guess both of these are to be expected since no deal was worked out.
But what is wrong — if 22 minutes of the film has been cut, saying this film is 22 minutes shorter or 22 minutes have been edited from the film originally released in the motion pictures? Which is, by the way, why you are renting it because you heard about it when it was released in the motion pictures. What is wrong with that?
Mr. Eves. Mr. Berman
Mr. Berman. Is that a disparaging comment? I guess that is my question.
Mr. Eves. That statement made in isolation, by itself, no, sir, I don't think it is.
Mr. Berman. So why haven't you gone — ^why haven't you agreed — that is a heck of a lot more communicative than "This film has been modified."
Mr. Eves. What we are testifying today, sir, is the legislation that begins with a warning label that states this is not the original product and then it goes through the litany of all the people that object and the reasons they object.
Mr. Berman. I understand you don't like the legislation, but in part of your argument you went to the trouble of bringing a television set that shows the labels that you are proud of that you have