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.

532 Graphic Artists Guild p. 2 manufacturers, distributors, etc., who are able to exploit the it. The contract determines the creator's remuneration; the experience and relative economic strength of the parties determines the contract. Congress recognized the potential for abuse in this relationship when it included the recapture provision in the 1976 copyright law. The creator, or his or her heirs, can reshuffle the deck. But adding another twenty years to the copyright term weights disposition of subsisting copyrights heavily in favor of the exploiter of the work, rather than the creator or his or her heirs. Twenty years makes a great deal of difference in the value of a work. Styles change, reputations are made and unmade. What might have appeared to be reasonable compensation, even if negotiated in good faith on both sides, may actually be wholly inadequate . If copyrights are to be extended another twenty years, disposition of subsisting copyrights must rest with the creators of the work, or with their inheritors. The windfall of a longer term should not be the unnegotiated windfall of the licensee. 2) Works Made For Hire American copyright law is unique in that it equates two classes of creators; creators-in-f act, and commissioners of works made for hire, or creators-at-law. All creative work is done by creators-in-f act, although the rights to some of their work is acquired by creators-at-law. Copyright term extension must not be achieved at the expense of creators-in-f act . Extending the copyright term to life plus seventy requires that the rights be retained by the creator-in-f act, in order that the copyright term may be calculated. Copyrights held by creatorsin-fact benefit both the individual rightsholder and the licensees with whom he or she does business. Works made for hire do not benefit the creator-in-f act, but the creator-at-law. Because the creator-in-f act relinquishes creator standing, there is no possibility of renegotiating payments over the life of the copyright, no option of recapturing rights, and no possibility of additional payment for subsequent additional uses of his or her work. Work made for hire does not offer incentives to the creator-in-f act . The Guild does not support extension of the work made for hire term. Adding twenty years to the copyright term across the board means that the term for works made for hire will be extended to ninety-five years. To encourage creativity, the term of works