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:

Title:
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
Date:
1996
Publisher:
Washington : U.S. G.P.O. : For sale by the U.S. G.P.O., Supt. of Docs., Congressional Sales Office
Volume:
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
Leaf #:
000316
Language:
English
Subjects:
Copyright -- United States, Copyright -- Motion pictures United States","Motion pictures -- Labeling United States","Motion pictures -- Conservation and restoration United States
Collection:
Books and Government & Law
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Boston Public Library
Sponsor:
Kahle/Austin Foundation and Omidyar Network
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
July 19, 2022
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.

308 is based on a United States work that is also unprotected in Europe, that new work should be a part of the continuing United States export engine in the world market. Even if the new work is based on a European work that remains under protection in Europe, popularity of the work in the United States will necessarily result in a license (to use the underlying work) in Europe, again with a net export gain to the United States. The argument that United States copyright owners will unfairly "lose" royalty revenues from Europe is therefore both wrong and incomplete. It is wrong because it is not unfair that a work enter the public domain 50 years after the death of its author. It is incomplete because it does not consider that the royalties in question will be paid not just by Europeans but also by Americans, and not just to United States copyright owners but also to copyright owners worldwide. Additional revenues to a few owners of old copyrights is not a public benefit justifying adoption of the legislation, and this remains true even though some part of those revenues would be paid by Europeans. The extension represents, rather, a heavy public cost, both in additional royalties paid by the United States public and in the loss of creative new works that will not be produced because the exclusive rights of copyright remain in full force on works that cost/benefit analysis would clearly place in the public domain. CONCLUSION The proposed legislation extending all copyright terms by 20 years is a bad idea for all but a few copyright owners. None of the current copyright terms of protection should be extended. The undersigned are all university professors who regularly teach or conduct legal research in the fields of coffy right or intellectual property. Howard B. Abrams, University of Detroit Mercy School of Law Martin J. Adelman Wayne State University Law School Howard C. Anawalt Santa Clara University School of Law Stephen R. Bamett University of California at Berkeley School of Law Margreth Barrett University of California Hastings College of the Law Written Testimony of Intellecmal Property Professors Page 17