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.
227
we would like to take the opportunity to try to give you some very narrow language to solve some of those problems, to work with the library associations to see that their needs are met.
Mrs. SCHROEDER. We would really appreciate that.
You also raised some questions about the beneficiaries of the extra 20 years and who they should be, especially where there's no existing termination right. Do you or Mr. Lehman have anything you want to say about that.
Ms. Peters. I just noted that in general the Constitution talks about authors, and authors have benefit, and that in 1976 the way that we handled that with giving the author the right to terminate, and that for some of the works that right has passed, and that that's a question. We're not actually advocating a position one way or the other because we actually are the ones who record the termination notices, and we get very, very small numbers compared to the works at large. I think last year we looked at what we got as far as termination notices, and it was something like 549, 541 of which covered musical compositions, and most didn't have multiple titles. So when you look at that small percentage in relation to the work as a whole, I'm not really sure where you want to come out, but I just did point out that in one instance there is no way for the author to basically recoup the extra 20 years, where all the other authors have that possibility.
Mrs. Schroeder. So you don't have any solution for us, but you're just
Ms. Peters. Well, I'm basically saying that
Mrs. Schroeder [continuing]. Making us mindful of it?
Ms. Peters [continuing]. Possibly you could consider another termination for those works, but I think that's your choice. What you really have is every other author having the ability to renegotiate for the extra 20 years, and there's this one little narrow category where that opportunity has passed.
Mrs. Schroeder. I really have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. I just want to thank Ambassador Barshefsky. I really did appreciate the terrific work you did in China. I know the committee was very, very impressed by the intellectual property agreement that you got, and you kind of pulled the rabbit out of the hat. So thank you very much
Ms. Barshefsky. Thank you.
Mrs. Schroeder [continuing]. For your hard work.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Moorhead. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Hoke.
Mr. Hoke. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
There are always winners and losers, and I'm trying to figure out who the winners are and who the losers are with this legislation. Maybe we could start with that.
IVls. Peters, have you got any thoughts on it?
Ms. Peters. Who are the winners?
Mr. Hoke. Well, the winners are fairly obvious.
Ms. Peters. OK.
Mr. Hoke. But go ahead.
Ms. Peters. The winners are obvious. It's the owner of works that are commercially viable and where there are new uses, especially because of new technology. Authors and other copyright own