ALAWON v2n55 (December 4, 1993) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/alawon/alawon-v2n55 ****Begin File******************Begin File*******************Begin File**** *************************************************************************** ISSN 1069-7799 ALAWON ALA Washington Office Newsline An electronic publication of the American Library Association Washington Office Volume 2, Number 55 December 4, 1993 In this issue: (216 lines) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND NII - HEARING HELD HOUSE PASSES COPYRIGHT REFORM ACT HOUSE PASSES HBCU BUILDING ACT *************************************************************************** INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND NII - HEARING HELD Some 27 witnesses from a variety of personal and organizational points of view provided testimony at the November 18 public hearing on intellectual property issues involved in the national information infrastructure initiative. The hearing was held by the Working Group on Intellectual Property of the Information Policy Committee of the Administration's Information Infrastructure Task Force. Bruce Lehman, Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, and chair of the working group, presided at the all-day event. Robert Oakley, Director of the Georgetown University Law Center Library and Washington representative of the American Association of Law Libraries, testified on behalf of AALL, ALA, the Association of Academic Health Science Library Directors, the Association of American Universities, the Association of Research Libraries, CAUSE, the Coalition for Networked Information, EDUCOM, the Medical Library Association, the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, the National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History, and the Special Libraries Association. In summary, Oakley said: Although the library and education communities believe it is premature to propose specific legislative or regulatory reforms while the information infrastructure is still in its infancy, we are concerned about the need to reaffirm that the rights granted to educators and to libraries and their users apply in the electronic environment as they have in the paper environment. We also believe that the law needs some strengthening to allow libraries to utilize fully the newest technology to preserve the nation's heritage and to meet the needs of their users. Concerning the specific questions asked by the working group, Oakley made the following points: * Copyright exists for the public good. * The NII should preserve fair use and the library exemptions and allow for a variety of pricing structures, including accommodating distribution of some works at no cost to the individual user. The preservation sections of the Copyright Act need some modest expansion to meet the needs of libraries to convert works into digital formats for preservation and to preserve digital works themselves. * Licensing proposals should accommodate fair use and library uses authorized in the Copyright Act. * Copyright labelling could facilitate distribution of certain works, but may be a standards issue, rather than a legal one. * Libraries and other educators will continue to educate users about their rights and responsibilities. * Interoperability standards are important; government should participate in voluntary standards setting, but should not impose standards. John Masten, Executive Vice President of the New York Public Library, also testified, making several points about what is desirable in any revision of intellectual property law and practice: Democratic access to information must be at the center. "It would be a terrible irony if, after having secured open access to the world of ideas through public libraries across America, this country could find no fair or reasonable way to secure that same access to information on the National Information Infrastructure." He recommended focusing on the importance of democratic access as a better guide than trying to adapt fair use to the networked environment. Some mechanism must be found, such as subsidies or consortium licensing arrangements, to provide access to proprietary databases via the network for those who cannot afford to pay. Finally, he said that mutually beneficial negotiated arrangements that recognize the wide variety of network environments would be preferable to a single standard licensing system. Most witnesses felt that copyright fundamentals were sound, that fair use provisions were sufficient to protect users in the NII environment, and that government should participate in, but not set, standards. Creators were concerned that they had little leverage in retaining reasonable electronic rights in an era of publishing and media mega-mergers. Industry groups urged reliance on licensing and contracting, and warned against premature standards setting. Joseph Cosgrove, a lawyer with the King's College (Wilkes-Barre, PA) Department of Political Science, raised questions about those who do not have the resources to access the NII. He felt the right to receive information is embodied in the patent and copyright clause in the Constitution. He recommended avoiding legal clashes from civil libertarians by using public and school libraries as public access points. Gary Griswold of InfoLogic Software, Inc., said that the concept of metering is not incompatible with the concept of the free public library. Software could allow information to be checked out of an electronic library for two weeks, after which it would disappear from the patron's machine and reappear in the library's machine available for another use. Robert Kahn of the Corporation for National Research Initiatives distinguished between knowledge which needs to be shared and the expression of that knowledge which is often protected. He used the example of knowledge about how to treat a disease; there may be only limited ways to express that knowledge. If the knowledge is codified in systems which are protected, that's a problem because the knowledge needs to be shared. Frank Connolly of American University recommended a proactive approach to fair use on the NII for students and teachers. He mentioned EDUCOM's Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for Electronic Learners. The recording industry recommended adding a right of public performance in sound recordings to the Copyright Act, although the broadcasting industry disagreed. Some witnesses recommended that devices designed to infringe or abet infringement should be made illegal. The multimedia industry was concerned about patents being awarded for basic abstract system level processes. Such patents grant exclusive rights and were felt to inhibit the development of added value by creators and users. Any additional written comments are due by December 10 to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Box 4, Washington, DC 20231. Robert Oakley recommended that the working group make the transcript of the hearing available over the Internet, and the working group will consider doing so. Otherwise, transcripts of the hearing should be available from the PTO after December 3 for $30. Copies of the written statements are available for inspection in Room 902 of Crystal Park Two, 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia. *************************************************************************** HOUSE PASSES COPYRIGHT REFORM ACT The House passed H.R. 897, the Copyright Reform Act of 1993, on November 20 by voice vote. The bill would revise copyright registration and deposit provisions by repealing sections 411(a) and 412 of the Copyright Act. Section 411(a) requires that authors register their works with the Copyright Office before bringing an infringement action. Since the United States joined the international Berne Convention in October 1988, this requirement has not applied to non-U.S. authors from Berne Convention countries. Section 412 conditions award of statutory damages and attorneys' fees on registration being obtained before an infringement occurs. These incentives to registration, to be repealed by the House-passed bill, also serve as incentives to deposit, assisting the Library of Congress in building its comprehensive collections. To mitigate the effects on LC of repealing these sections, H.R. 897 as approved by the Judiciary Committee included a number of revisions requested by the Librarian of Congress. The section 408 registration process would be simplified and group registrations expanded; alternative forms of deposit would be allowed; and an appeals process established. The Register of Copyrights would be required to hold annual public hearings on the section 408 voluntary deposit and registration requirements. The Librarian of Congress is to report to Congress three years after enactment regarding how the changes in the registration system made by the bill have impacted on the Library. The section 407 mandatory deposit requirements would be streamlined and strengthened, including a clarification that the obligation to deposit arises without any need for prior notification or demand, and that section 407 deposits could be used to satisfy the requirements of section 408. The Librarian would assume enforcement authority, and could recover an amount equivalent to attorney's fees if the Library had to bring suit to enforce deposit requirements. LC would publish an annual list of types of works for which mandatory deposit is sought, and maintain a database of mandatory deposits. The Librarian would conduct a study on expanding mandatory deposit to cover works that are technically unpublished, but are publicly disseminated, such as TV broadcasts. The original bill changed appointment of the Register of Copyrights to a presidential appointment; the House-passed H.R. 897 leaves this appointment to the Librarian of Congress, as provided in current law. The Senate has taken no action on this legislation. *************************************************************************** HOUSE PASSES HBCU BUILDING ACT On November 22, H.R. 2921, the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Historic Building Restoration and Preservation Act, was passed by the House of Representatives (see November 22 CR, pp. H10912-5). The bill, which authorizes appropriations for preservation and restoration of buildings or structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places or designated a National Historic Landmark, has funding levels authorized at $25,000,000 for FY95 and "such sums" for each of the fiscal years 1996, 1997, and 1998. For FY95, it earmarks $5,000,000 for Fisk University in Tennessee, where the entire campus has been designated by the Department of Interior as a National Historic District. The report (H. Report 103-398) states that The United Negro College fund has agreed to match a Departmental contribution of $10 million for the preservation of eleven structures in Georgia, North Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Washington, D.C., Virginia and Delaware. *************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** ALAWON (ISSN 1069-7799) is an irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office, 110 Maryland Avenue, N.E., Washington, DC 20002-5675. Internet: alawash@alawash.org; Phone: 202-547-4440; Fax: 202-547-7363. Editor: Carol C. Henderson (cch@alawash.org). All or part of ALAWON may be redistributed, with appropriate credits. ALAWON is available free of charge and is available only in electronic form. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe ala-wo [your name]" to listserv@uicvm (Bitnet) or listserv@uicvm.uic.edu (internet). Back issues and other documents are available from the list server. To find out what's available, send the message "send ala-wo filelist" to the listserv. The ALA-WO filelist contains the list of files with the exact filename and filetype. To get a particular file, issue the command "send filename filetype" to the listserv. Do not include the quotes in your commands. *************************************************************************** ***End of file******************End of file******************End of file***