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.
184
A. REVIEW OF ARGUMENTS BASED ON CONSmERATIONS WEIGHED BY TfflS COMMITTEE IN 1976 "
Four of the seven considerations that led the Judiciary Committee to conclude that copyright terms should be extended m 1976 are still relevant today. Each of them is discussed below with a brief summary and evaluation of the arguments on that particular consideratioa
I. Public Benefit and limited Times.
a. Arguments. Many of the opponents arguing against term extension have raised
the legal problems associated with removing property from the public domain. ** H.R. 989, however, does not propose applying term extension retroactively to restore copyrights in works already in the public domaia " Opponents also argue that term extension provides the public with no benefits and imposes substantial costs, " and freezes the public domain for 20 years. They assert that diminishing the public domain stifles creativity especially in the production of derivative works and they cite examples of contemporary works based on materials in the public domain. " Some opponents also assert that
" S^ text at pages 9-1 1 supra for the complete text of these provisions.
** Sm, e.^. Commenis 127, 123, 123, 121, 122 and 120. These and others reveal concerns about restoration of films under the North American Free Trade Agreement or any other law.
" Some auibon' groups, however, will likely argue that this should be done, citing the recent restoration of foreign copyrights under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act or the North American Free Trade Agreement Since H.R. 989 does not prt>pose to restore works in the public domain, this staiemem does not address the host of complex policy issues raised by restoration of U.S. copyrights.
" Sm Comments 8S and 97 at 8-9.
** Sm Comment 19 'Comment of Law Professors on Copyright Office Term of Protection Snidy ' [hereinafter Comment 19 law professon]. Comment 1 1 (Fairness in Copyright Coalition) at 2 'We are concerned with NEW authors, NEW creativity, and the promotion of learning. New authors need a rich and diverse public domain to create and educate.' Id. Seg alss Comment 19. at 12; Comment 147, at 2; and Comment 148, a I.
dirr^duntion loc
July 11. 1995 23