I recently received a note from my congresswoman, Tammy Baldwin regarding the License to Hack bill.
Here it is:
August 5, 2002
Dear Mr. Zellmer,
Thank you for contacting me regarding online, digital music and copy
protection. It is always good to hear from you.
Technology in the music recording industry is progressing very quickly and
our existing laws are sometimes difficult to apply to a more
technologically-advanced setting. As the internet moves into new areas of
communication, it is inevitably going to raise new issues related to
privacy, commerce, and intellectual property. There are two major debates
now underway relating to digital recordings and copyright law.
First, there is a debate about access to music and video online. Under
the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA), recording devices designed or
marketed for the primary purpose of making digital music recordings were
granted some protection from copyright infringement claims. The covered
devices are required to incorporate technology to prevent serial copying.
In addition, the manufacturers of these devices pay a royalty to copyright
owners. The AHRA does not allow for the widespread distribution of
copyrighted music. The recent case of the online music company Napster is
an example. Napster did not obtain permission from the owners of much of
the copyrighted music available on the site and faced serious legal
challenges under the AHRA.
Some are concerned that the recording companies have been inappropriately
restricting access to online and other distributors. The law is clear in
requiring that composers and performers receive payment for the use of
their copyrighted material. Companies like Napster and MP3.COM have
complained that licenses for use of these materials are not being made
available or are only available at an excessive cost, making them
effectively unattainable. I am hopeful these internet companies,
copyright owners, and the recording industry will voluntarily develop a
workable system that allows online music access to prosper. I believe it
is in the recording industry's best interest to facilitate access to their
music.
Should the industry not develop a fair, workable system that provides
reasonable, affordable access for consumers, I would support Congressional
action to address the problem. One bill, H.R. 2724, the Music Online
Competition Act (MOCA) would create a compulsory license for digital
recordings. This would mandate access to a composition at a preset
negotiated rate on a non-discriminatory basis. This legislation was
introduced by Representatives Chris Cannon (R-UT) and
Richard Boucher (D-VA). It was referred to the House Judiciary Committee
on which I sit. I will carefully consider this, and other legislation,
with the goal of ensuring broad consumer access to music online.
The second major debate in this area is over copy protection. The
recording and motion picture industries are increasingly concerned over
illegal reproduction of their copyrighted materials. While illegal
copying has always occurred, it was not until the development of digital
copies that the problem has become more acute because digital copies have
no degradation of sound or video quality. Since they are an exact copy of
equal quality, pirated copies are very valuable. When an illegal copy is
sold, the composer and performer do not receive compensation for their
work.
Under current copyright law, when a person purchases a CD or DVD, they are
buying the right to view that material and reproduce it for their own
personal use. Thus, if you buy a Madonna CD, you can put a copy on your
computer, re-record it on a cassette tape, or burn it on a new CD for your
own listening. In order to prevent illegal piracy, companies are
developing various technological means to prevent copying. For example,
some recording companies have marketed CDs that cannot be copied to a
computer. Others are experimenting with tethering technology that would
allow a person to listen to a recording for a limited period of time
before it is disabled. The customer would play for the recording for that
period and would have to pay to renew it.
There has also been legislation introduced in the United States Senate
that would mandate copy protection technology. The Consumer Broadband and
Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA), previously known as the
Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) was introduced by
Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC). This bill (S. 2048) would require all
digital devices sold in the United States to include copy protection. The
copy protections standards would be established by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) and include civil and criminal penalties.
Other legislation on digital rights management has also been introduced by
Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) and Representative Howard Berman (D-CA).
Although I believe that illegal piracy is a concern, I am skeptical that
mandated copy protection is the best way to address this problem. As this
debate continues, I will carefully examine the various proposals to
determine what is in the best interest of the consumer. I serve on the
House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual
Property that has jurisdiction over this area of law. Rest assured, I
will keep your views in mind as any legislation comes before my
subcommittee or the full House.
Again, thank you for sharing your views. Your opinion matters to me. If
I can be of service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to let
me know.
Sincerely,
Tammy Baldwin
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin's 2nd District
Wisconsin Office:
10 East Doty St., Suite 405
Madison, WI 53703
Phone: 608-258-9800
Fax: 608-258-9808
Washington, DC Office:
1022 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2906
Fax: 202-225-6942
http://tammybaldwin.house.gov
9:56:59 AM 
|
