Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, we in Congress are tasked in the Constitution with promoting science and the useful arts through giving authors and inventors the exclusive right to their writings and discoveries for a limited time. The first copyright act provided that the ``limited time'' would be a term of protection of 14 years, renewable once. Since that time, the copyright term has exploded to 95, or 120 years, or 70 years after the death of the artist, depending on the circumstance. I have serious concerns that these lengthy terms tip the balance toward limiting rather than promoting creativity and innovation. Unfortunately, a bill--the CLASSICS Act--currently under consideration in the Judiciary Committee blows past current U.S. copyright term to provide a windfall to a select few.

The CLASSICS Act (Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, and Important Contributions to Society Act) would give up to 144 of exclusive copyright protection for digital transmissions of pre- 1972 sound recordings. Not only that, but it would create a hodge-podge of State and Federal rights, basically cherry-picking the most valuable right under the Federal regime and leaving the rest to be governed by States. This means that if a library wants to make a copy of a recording, and then digitally transmit that copy, it would have to navigate two different regimes--creating more uncertainty, not less.

That is why, today, I am introducing the ACCESS to Recordings Act. It would give artists the full suite of Federal rights, as well as the uniformity and certainty that goes with the Federal copyright system. Along with that comes the exceptions and limitations, including those that enable archivists to preserve recordings, many of which are starting to degrade in their original physical medium and urgently need to be digitally preserved. In addition, it provides the same term available to post-72 recordings--95 years from publication. Let's be clear that is a significant term of protection. A song recorded in 1960 will enjoy protection until 2055--37 years from now.

I hope that someday, in the not too distant future, my colleagues and I can sit down and talk about real copyright reform, but in the meantime, we shouldn't be expanding term and making it more difficult for users of the copyright system--including both artists and the public--to navigate their rights and obligations. What I suggest instead is a straight-forward application of the Federal rules that apply to post-1972 recordings to those created before that time. We must remember that copyright is for the public interest, not just for the enrichment of large corporations. That is why I am introducing the ACCESS to Recordings Act.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source