« EelmineJätka »
John M. Kernochan, professor of law, Columbia University (letter to Hon.
APPENDIX IV-FURTHER MATERIALS FROM WITNESSES
a. Letter from Hon. Ralph Oman to Hon. Robert W. Kastenmeier (dated
Nov. 15, 1985)
Robert W. Kastenmeier (dated June 18, 1986)....
(dated April 13, 1988).
April 25, 1988)..
(dated April 26, 1988).
a. Letter of Transmittal from President Ronald Reagan to the Senate of
the United States (dated June 18, 1986)......
a. Dam, The Growing Importance of International Protection of Intellec-
tual Property, 21 Internat'l Lawyer 627 (1987)..
a. Letter from Elliot Silverstein to Hon. Robert W. Kastenmeier (dated
Oct. 29, 1987)
March 8, 1988) with attachments .....
a. Letter from Prof. Edward J. Damich (et al.) to Hon. Robert W. Kasten-
meier (dated Feb. 22, 1988).
APPENDIX V-MATERIALS RELATING TO ARREARAGES TO THE W.I.P.O
November 20, 1987).
Howard Berman, Hon. Hamilton Fish, Jr., and Hon. Henry Hyde to Hon.
W. Allen Wallis (dated December 28, 1987)
meier (dated January 22, 1988) with attachments.....
February 2, 1988).....
meier (dated February 22, 1988) with attachments..
Petrone (dated April 28, 1988).
June 21, 1988)..
APPENDIX VI-FURTHER PRINTED MATERIALS
Berne Conventions" from Universal Copyright Convention Analyzed (ed. T.
Kupferman and M. Foner) 141 (1955)...
tion of Literary and Artistic Works, 9 Copyright 291 (1986)....
BERNE CONVENTION IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 1987
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, DC. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m., in Room 2226, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Robert W. Kastenmeier, Chairman, presiding.
Present: Representatives Kastenmeier, Moorhead, Slaughter, Lungren, Coble, Cardin, Bryant, and Schroeder.
Staff present: Michael J. Remington, chief counsel; David W. Beier, counsel; Thomas E. Mooney, associate counsel; and Audrey K. Marcus, clerk.
Mr. KASTENMEIER. The committee will come to order.
Mr. SLAUGHTER. I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee permit the meeting to be covered in whole or in part by television broadcast, radio broadcast, and/or still photography pursuant to Rule 5 of the Committee rules.
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Without objection, the request is agreed to.
Today's hearing is, I think, an historic event. It is the first House hearing on Berne implementing legislation since 1936. The passage of time doesn't diminish in any respect the importance of the subject. And given the current debate over the trade bill, the budget deficit, and the twin needs to promote American creativity and preserve American jobs, U.S. adherence to the Berne Convention is potentially the most important intellectual property issue to be considered by the 100th Congress.
The Berne Convention for the protection of literary and artistic works, as revised in Paris in 1971, is the world's premier copyright treaty. Berne is adhered to by 76 nations, including most of the industrialized world. The United States is not a member; neither is the Soviet Union nor the People's Republic of China.
Copyright touches all Americans in their homes, schools, libraries, workplaces. It directly affects all of us who enjoy books, films, television, music, videotapes, computer programming, software, and other works of arts. Determining the scope of copyright law requires great caution, particularly in a rapidly changing society,
such as ours, which values the free flow of information and a free marketplace, both domestically and internationally.
When I introduced H.R. 1623, together with Mr. Moorhead, the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1987, I referred to Berne as a "brooding presence." Ever since its establishment, 100 years ago, more or less, in 1886, Berne has lurked in the background of U.S. copyright legislation. When Congress and this Subcommittee drafted the Copyright Reform Act of 1976, we also, at that time, had an eye on Berne.
In facts and certain particulars, the life of the author plus 50, the 1976 Act really conformed to Berne.
Although 11 years have passed, and rather quickly, since the 1976 Act, this is still an unresolved question, U.S. adherence to Berne. In order to focus debate, I have introduced this bill, H.R. 1623, which permits the United States to adhere to Berne through the front door. We should enter, however, only if, after full hearings and debate, Congress determines on balance that Berne adherence serves the needs of the country and its citizens. The initiative seeks to raise all of the questions that must be asked for the fullest range of private and public interests to be aware of what Berne adherence will mean now and would mean tomorrow.
Without objection, I would insert the text of H.R. 1623, together with my explanatory floor remarks in the appendix of the hearing record. See Appendix I. And I would also ask, without objection, to insert in the appendix the text of the Berne Convention known as the Paris Act. See Appendix II.
Mr. KASTENMEIER. The record should reflect that the United States has chosen not to join the Berne Union in the past, presumably because we did not want for our society the kind of copyright laws that the Convention requires. Due to the growing internationalization of copyright law, the trade imbalance, and so forth, we doubtless have a growing consensus for a contrary decision.
The purpose of this initial hearing is to establish a body of knowledge about Berne. The Subcommittee will try to identify areas of agreement and disagreement about Berne and changes to American copyright law necessary if we decide that adherence is in our best interests.
Before introducing the first witness, let me indicate to my colleagues, the press and the public the Subcommittee's tentative schedule on Berne implementation legislation. I would expect a number of hearing days to be in order. Some hearings, such as today's, would be general in scope; others would be more narrowly delineated or focused, and would examine specific issues such as moral rights, the jukebox compulsory license formalities, architectural works. An examination of the administration of the Berne Union by the World Intellectual Property Organization will also be addressed. Finally, the views of European and Third World Countries on Berne questions would also, of course, be in order.
I assume the next hearing would be in mid-July, and it specifically would focus on the subject of Berne and moral rights.
I would like to lastly recognize the efforts of the Ad Hoc Working Group on U.S. Adherence to the Berne Convention, the members of which have given freely of their time to examine and offer answers