The screen writer (Apr-Oct 1948)

The Authors' League Today By OSCAR HAMMERSTEIN II < CO > w w H »— i ANY assessment of our intended progress in the Authors' League should embrace an understanding of the structure within which our separate groups of writers operate. Each Guild works on those problems which are peculiarly its own and in these cases, the Authors' League is merely a supporting prop. There are, however, many issues of deep importance to all writers in all Guilds and the handling of these common problems is the job of the parent organization, The Authors' League. During the past years, the four Guilds have established solid gains in the media in which they work. Today, we enter a phase in our history where, with each Guild well on the road to the solution of its individual problems, the most important issues become those which are common to all writers and all Guilds. It is at this point that the committees of the Authors' League with their delegated authorities take on an individuality of their own and it is within the structure of the League that we must operate. Our current problems are : ( 1 ) The immediate threat of censorship ; (2) Obtaining workable copyright legislation; (3) Striving for more equitable taxation of writers; (4) The establishment of the principles of licensing rather than selling our works. 1 . Censorship — A League Censorship Committee has, for a long time, concerned itself with individual cases of specific works being suppressed in a particular locality. (The traditional center of such activities has been Boston. ) We have also worked in the broader scene of censorship and in the score of years preceding World War II we had our reward in seeing narrow restrictions on subject matter and treatment relax and, to an extent, dissipate. In these local and national struggles over censorship, we frequently lost individual cases but again and again we would find that even in these cases our ultimate purpose would be accomplished. We would lose the first round but a few years later we would find that the position taken by our opponents had become untenable in the light of public awakening. We might fail to lift a ban on a particular book but the nuisance value of our attacks made individuals and groups less willing to undertake arbitrary action a second time. Our work in cases like these continues. New threats to our freedom and new devices are being developed. There is, for instance, a recurring suggestion for self-censorship in the theatre. Such a policy might easily create a preproduction white-washing of plays that could be accomplished with deadly efficiency and would preclude the possibility of public defense. To all such ideas as this we are of course opposed. There are painfully clear indications that the general tide of restrictive forces is rising. The national insecurity of mind is reflected in the way that the mere threat of censorship brings immediate and submissive response from picture theatre operators, booksellers, screen and radio companies alike. This indirect censorship technique is simple. An individual who speaks unofficially for political and religious groups issues a statement condemning a book and the result is a quick curtailment in the sale of that book in the local stores. The only defense against this technique is constant alertness and readiness to strike back. But the frequency of these cases and the attendant surrender of vulnerable commercial interests is alarming. All these instances are of small significance compared to the much broader and sweeping technique of the Thomas Committee, the extralegal condemnation of the man together with his writing. This threat of the censorship of an individual, frightening in its implications, overshadows all our other problems in this field. The League has issued a statement and taken a firm stand and it intends to continue its fight against this Congressional abuse until the American people are awakened to all that it signifies. 2. Copyright — The need to secure workable copyright laws is fundamental. Those who have been members for a number of years know of the struggle carried on by the League and ,the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers in previous years. We lost this struggle before the war. The United States with a bland indifference to the laws of other countries, maintained its copyright isolation policy. Actually, this isolation was liked by motion picture producers and distributors, and radio broadcasters and they used their tremendous finances and political influence to urge Congress to refuse an adjustment of our laws to those of other countries. During the war there was nothing we or the author societies of other nations could do. Now, however, under UNESCO's guidance, a commission is taking up the study of copyright. The Authors' League and the Song Writers' Protective Association will take a leading part in framing recommendations. ( It goes without saying that the industries will also be heard from.) It is up to us to persuade the commission that if international understanding and peace are to be attained, a free exchange of ideas is essential and the best way to insure this is for the nations in a spirit of reciprocity to negotiate treaties protecting literary properties. Accomplishment in this field involves painstaking labor over extended periods on the part of our Copyright Committee, our lawyers, our staff and our Washington representative. 3. Taxation ■ — There is no group upon whom the burden of taxation 24 The Screen Writer, April, 1948