analyzing both the laws and court decisions on the federal and state level, the Group concluded: Given the substantial protection now available for the country, the protection of moral rights is compatible with The message is clear and unambiguous: no federal moral rights law need be enacted for the U.S. to adhere to Berne. Moreover, if a moral rights provision were inserted into the implementing legislation, it could have the effect of shattering the consensus that has emerged in this country that we should join Berne. Senator Leahy alluded to this point at the time he introduced his own Berne bill, S. 1301: What Any moral rights amendment to the Copyright Act would be Mr. Chairman, Congress should forge ahead. It should not let the moral rights issue distract us from the overriding goal of Berne adherence. Specific moral rights proposals should be considered by Congress, if at all, separate and apart from the debate on Berne. Conclusion The confluence of two factors - the emergence of piracy on a massive global scale and developments in our laws that leave no doubt that the U.S. satisfies Berne's moral rights requirements has prompted us to come out in favor of Berne adherence. But as I mentioned at the outset, our support is contingent on the manner in which the implementing legislation addresses the moral rights issue. Specifically, it is absolutely critical that the implementing legislation, along with the appropriate legislative history, make crystal clear that: 1) the Berne Convention is neither self-executing nor directly enforceable in the U.S.; 2) the bundle of rights under current U.S. law satisfies Berne requirements in the "moral rights" area and adherence to Berne neither contracts nor expands rights granted under current domestic laws in this area; 3) private rights exist in this country only to the extent specifically provided for in U.S. domestic law, and without regard to any laws or practices of other Berne signatories; and 4) existing laws and the implementing legislation meet our obligations under Berne and no further legislation is necessary for that purpose. Thank you for your consideration of our views. 85-836 0 - 88 - 12 Senator DECONCINI. Thank you, Mr. Brown, very much. Mr. Neilly. STATEMENT OF ANDREW H. NEILLY, JR., PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC. Mr. NEILLY. Mr. Chairman, my name is Andrew Neilly. I appreciate the opportunity to testify as a publisher in support of legislation which would, at long last, make the United States a full member of the international copyright community. The views I express today are shared by the majority of American publishers of all kinds, many of whom have written to you and to Chairman Kastenmeier. I am president and chief executive officer of John Wiley & Sons, an international publisher of books, journals and training programs for education and the professions, founded in 1807. Wiley's interest in international protection for authors and publishers has a long history. In the 1840's we were the first American publisher to offer royalties to foreign writers such as Thomas Carlyle and Elizabeth Barrett at a time when they enjoyed no protection in this country. I joined Wiley in 1947 as a college traveler, calling on professors to sell textbooks. Over the years I have become familiar with publishing practices and author relations in the United States and abroad. I am former chairman of the Association of American Publishers, and in June I will assume the chairmanship of the International Publishers Association, whose members constitute the national associations of 43 countries of the free world. Wiley, like other publishers, has seen its markets and its publications affected by the growth of English as the language of science and the preeminent contributions of the United States to research and development, literature, and education. Our publications address worldwide markets. Nearly one-third of our revenues are derived from exports, from licensed translations or materials produced by our foreign subsidiaries. We are part of an industry which exports not merely physical objects but ideas, ideals, knowledge, and creativity. This economically and intellectually important market is dependent on an orderly system of national laws and international treaties. In countries not reached by that system, the cost of piracy to American industry is great-$1.3 billion per annum in 10 countries alone, according to a 1985 study by the Intellectual Property Alli ance. For example, during 1987 over 350 Wiley titles were included in printings of 2 million copies of pirated books in Korea. Unfortunately, we were in third place. This is a form of flattery that could be improved upon. Since 1952 the United States has participated in this system through the UCC, whose lower standards were designed specifically to accommodate the 1909 Copyright Act. The higher standards of protection introduced in the 1976 act were intended to pave the way for our accession to Berne. It is Berne, and not the UCC, which establishes the high standards of protection which prevail throughout much of the world and which we would like to see established worldwide. Perhaps the most compelling advantage of Berne membership is the opportunity to exert leadership in the councils of international copyright. Evolving technologies and continued pressure for access to knowledge and information will force debate and require that these new issues be addressed. We want our Government to be able to participate fully in the resolution of these issues. In addition, Berne provides support and credibility for trade initiatives such as GATT, GSP and CBI, further protection in fighting piracy, and the effectiveness of these efforts is derived from Berne's high standard of protection. I find it particularly significant that the People's Republic of China is considering adherence to Berne. By the turn of the century there will be more people using the English language in China than in the United States, but today the number of books and journals which Wiley is able to sell or to copublish in China is exceeded many times by the copies, printed without authorization and without remuneration to either author or publisher. Finally, I believe there is a moral imperative to this question. How can we encourage others to adopt and maintain effective and comprehensive copyright laws? How can we complain with conviction and credibility that poorer nations fail to respect our property rights? How can we claim to have a voice in the development of international copyright systems if, after careful preparation and with every encouragement from abroad, we reject this historic opportunity? You will hear from a segment of the publishing community that adherence to Berne would alter longstanding commercial practices and the balance between the rights of authors and publishers. I am satisfied that Berne adherence need not affect these relationships. All of the bills before you contain the appropriate provisions, as I believe they must, to ensure that adherence would not affect U.S. domestic law. As a practical matter, credits to authors and changes in content in revisions or adaptations, or the editing of multiauthor books or journals, are resolved through contract provisions or negotiations. Senator DECONCINI. Mr. Neilly, will you please conclude? Mr. NEILLY. All right. Senator DECONCINI. Thank you. In closing, I am proud to add my support to that of the other members of the coalition, the national committee and others who strongly urge that the United States adhere to Berne. Thank you. [The prepared statement of Mr. Neilly follows:] STATEMENT OF ANDREW H. NEILLY, JR. FOR JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC. Mr. Chairman, opportunity to my name is Andrew Neilly. I appreciate this testify, as a publisher, in support of legislation which would at long last make the United States a full member of the international copyright community through adherence to the Berne Convention. I know that the views I express today are shared by the majority of concerned American publishers of trade, school, college, reference, professional, and scientific and technical books and journals, many of whom have written to you and to Kastenmeier. al Chairman I am President and Chief Executive Officer of John Wiley & Sons, Inc., a leading international publisher of books, journals, training programs, and other materials for education and professiondevelopment founded in 1807. Wiley's interest in international protection for authors and publishers also has a long history. In the 1840's we were the first American publishers to offer royalties to foreign writers such as Thomas Carlyle and Elizabeth Barrett, at a time when they enjoyed no protection in this country. In 1972 our Chairman, W. Bradford Wiley, testified before this body on a panel support of accession to the Paris text of the Universal Copyright I hope that today's hearings will lead to the logical next step of adherence to Berne. in Convention. I joined Wiley in 1947, as a "college traveler," calling on college professors to sell textbooks. Over the years I have become familiar with publishing practices and author relations in the United States and abroad. I am a former Chairman of the American As of this June, I will assume the ChairInternational Publishers Association, whose members Association of Publishers. manship of the constitute the national publishing associations of 43 countries of free world, and whose principal goals include freedom to publish and the protection of copyright. the Wiley, like other publishers, has seen its markets and its publications affected by the growth of English as the language of science world and the preeminent contributions of the United States to literature and education. More and more, our publications address worldwide markets. licensed We established our first foreign sub sidiary in 1959; today nearly one-third of Wiley's revenues from publications and training programs are derived from exports, from editions in, at last count, forty-seven foreign languages, or from publications and other materials produced by foreign subsidiaries in England, Canada, Australia, Japan and other countries. We are part of an industry which exports not merely physical objects, but ideas, ideals, knowledge, and creativity. This economically In countries and intellectually important market is dependent on an orderly system of national laws and international treaties. not reached by that system, the cost of copyright piracy to American industry is great--$1.3 billion in ten countries alone according to a 1985 study by the Intellectual Property Alliance. As a specific and by no means unusual example, during 1987 over 350 Wiley titles were included in printings of 2 million pirated textbooks in Korea. in whose 1909 Since 1952 the United States has, of course, participated this system primarily through the Universal Copyright Convention, lower standards were designed specifically to accommodate our Copyright Act. The higher standards of protection introduced under the 1976 Copyright Act and the subsequent expiration of the Manufacturing Clause were intended to pave the way for United States accession to Berne. It is Berne, and not the UCC which establishes the high standards of copyright protection which prevail through much of the world, and which we seek to have established worldwide. In an age when new technologies, and growing international markets require increasing vigilence of copyright interests and put an increasing burden on international copyright systems, I believe that United States accession to Berne is essential. In the long run, perhaps the most compelling advantage of Berne membership is the opportunity to exercise leadership in the principal councils of international copyright. Nothing is more certain than that evolving technologies and continued pressure for access to knowledge and that new issues be want our information will force debate and require addressed. The American copyright industries government to be able to participate fully and effectively in the resolution of these issues, and to insure at the very least |