REPORT: 

The Current Status of the Copyright 
Revision Bill 
Rose Rosengard 

ALTHOUGH IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE PRESENT CONGRESS WILL ACT ON THE 1"1 new copyright bill, significant progress has been made this session to-
wards the bill's completion and ultimate passage. The Sub-Committee 

of the House Judiciary Committee has now completed its work and made its 
report to the full Judiciary Committee, which in tum has approved the report. 
If a bill were written and introduced in the House this session, however, the 
Senate would not have time to consider a companion bill at the same time; 
moreover, in addition to reading the House report, the Senate may wish to 
hold its own hearings on the subject. Thus, since without Senate action the 
House would have to reintroduce the bill next session in any case, it will prob-
ably refrain from acting this session. 

The Senate notwithstanding, it is questionable whether the House could 
resolve certain controversial issues with sufficient speed to allow presentation 
of the final bill this session. In fact, only one portion of the bill seems to have 
been completely settled at the present moment: it is reasonably certain that 
Congress will extend the present copyright term to include the life of the author 
plus fifty years thereafter. The problems of copying, duplication, storage, and 
retrieval with computer and photo-copying devices, on the contrary, will have 
to be settled by a compromise which will undoubtedly prove less than satis-
factory to all parties concerned. This situation is hardly surprising, considering 
the disparate objectives of writers and publishers on the one hand and copying 
interests in the educational world on the other. 

In addition to research needs of scholars, the "Fair-Use" section of the bill 
involves the desire of educational television interests to obtain broad exemp-
tions from payment of fees for the use of copyrighted works. Writers and 
publishers seem willing to make certain concessions to these interests, but the 
Educational Broadcasters apparently want more. The matter is still being 
negotiated and some compromise is likely. 

Telecasts by the Community Antenna Television Systems (CATV), which 
are judged to serve only as supplements to local coverage, will probably be 
exempted from royalty payments, but payment will almost certainly be exacted 
for broadcasts in areas not otherwise covered by local stations at the same time. 
This too is still under negotiation. 

The jukebox industry opposes the latest provision calling for a payment of 
3 cents every three months for use of a work in a machine. While the matter is 
still being negotiated, it seems clear that the exemption currently enjoyed by 

ROSE ROSENGARD is a doctoral candidate in the department of music, Columbia Uni-
versity. 

175 



tht' industry will be repealed and that some royalty payment will be required. 
It is t'qually clear that whatever the industry does pay will be provided for in 
the statute. \Vhether provision will also be made to renegotiate an increase in 
tht' statutory rate at some later time is not yet known. If it is not and if the 
history of the 1909 statute is considered as precedent, it could mean that no 
increase in the jukebox statutory rate will be effected until the copyright law 
is again revised - that is, perhaps not for another sixty years. 

The fee of2 cents a side required by the 1909 law for every recording made 
of a work will be increased to 2.5 cents or one-half cent per minute, whichever 
is greater. The recording industry has raised little opposition to the increase, 
but writers and publishers are very much dissatisfied by the %-cent increase, 
which they feel bears no relationship to the rise in the cost ofliving since 1909 
and is inadequate in comparison with the high salaries earned by recording 
artists. The rate is a ceiling; therefore, negotiation of a higher rate is forbidden, 
although there is nothing to prevent recording companies from negotiating 
lower rates. In effect, the recording company is being protected, although it 
is the copyright owner whom Congress is charged to protect. 

information about the present state of the so-called Manufacturer's 
Clause (requiring manufacture of an item in the U.S.A. in return for full 
copyright protection) is now available. 

Thus while the relevant material has been collected from all interested 
parties, further compromises will have to be reached before the House Com-
mittee is ready to report out its bill. Assuming that the new Congress does not 
differ significantly from the old in its attitude towards copyright practice, a 
new law will in all likelihood be passed during the coming session. 

176