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 #:
000589
Language:
English
Subjects:
Copyright -- United States, Copyright -- Motion pictures United States","Motion pictures -- Labeling United States","Motion pictures -- Conservation and restoration United States
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
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.

581 Stanford Law School. Stanford. California 9430.5-8610 PALL GOLDSTEIN Stella W and Ira S Lillick Professor Telephone: (415) 7S3-0313 OF Law Facsimile: (415) 32708ii 28 June 1995 Mr. Jack J. Valenti President Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. 1600 Eye Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Re: Copyright Term Extension Act of 1995 Dear Mr. Valenti: This letter responds to your request for an analysis of the pros and cons of S.483 and H.R.989, the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1995, which in general would extend the present term of copyright protection by twenty years. The main arguments for and against copyright term extension center on its domestic effects on producers and users of copyrighted works, and on its impact on this country's balance of international copyright trade. This letter will assess only the economic impact of copyright extension upon purely domestic copyright activities. Both the proponents and opponents of copyright term extension have raised important issues. But neither side has pursued the full domestic implications of term extension. Extension's opponents have properly questioned whether, after discounting future revenues to their present value, extension will increase incentives to produce copyrighted works; they have, however, failed to subject copyright extension's social costs to a comparable discount. Further, social discount aside, extension's opponents have overstated the social costs of copyright protection during an extended term and have understated or entirely ignored the social costs of disseminating public domain works. Finally, both opponents and proponents of extension have overlooked the significant issue of transaction costs that surrounds a lengthy copyright term generally.