November 25, 1997

President William J. Clinton
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500


Dear President Clinton:

The Association for Computing's U.S. Public Policy Committee believes that the "No Electronic Theft Act" (H.R. 2265), which is now before you, does not adequately reflect the nature of the new digital environment and will have a negative impact on the rich scientific communications that have developed on the Internet in many fields, including computer science. For this reason, we are asking you to veto the legislation. We agree that copyright holders have a legitimate need to protect their intellectual property. However, we are concerned that the bill was rushed through both Houses of Congress without careful consideration of its unintended consequences.

We are concerned the Bill may:

• Restrict scientists and other professionals from making their research available on the Internet for use by colleagues and students. Most scientists do not own the copyright on their own materials. Instead, that copyright ownership is retained by the scientific journal which peer-reviews and publishes the research. Under the No Electronic Theft Act, an author who posts their research on the Internet, and whose documents are frequently read on-line, could be subject to criminal prosecution. If the bill becomes law, scientists may have to choose between having their work peer-reviewed or making it widely available.
  
  
• Criminalize the transfer of information that is currently protected under the U.S. 'fair use' doctrine. Copyright law is derived from the U.S. Constitution and is intended to advance "science and the useful arts." The fair-use doctrine protects reading and nonprofit copying and thus allows scientists and educators to openly exchange information. H.R. 2265 does not explicitly protect the "fair use" privilege which makes this open exchange of scientific information possible.
  
  
• Chill free speech in universities and research labs. The terminology used in the Bill, including "willfully" and "for profit," are not defined; it is unclear what the parameters of a criminally prosecutable copyright infringement are. As a result, it is likely that many institutions will mandate that all copyrighted documents be removed from the net to avoid having to defend copyright infringement prosecutions.
  

We hope that you will veto this measure and ask your staff to work with Congress during the next session to develop more sensible legislation.

Sincerely,

Dr. Barbara Simons Chair,
U.S. Public Policy Committee
Association For Computing


The Association for Computing (ACM) is the largest and oldest professional association of computer scientists in the United States. ACM's U.S. Public Policy Committee (USACM) facilitates communication between computer scientists and policy makers on issues of concern to the computing community.

cc:

Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
Ira Magaziner, Senior Adviser to President
Brian Kahin, Office of Science Technology and Public Policy.
Henry J. Hyde, Chair, House Judiciary Committee
John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee
Howard Coble, Chair, Courts and Intellectual Property Subcommittee, House Judiciary Committee
Orrin G. Hatch, Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee
Patrick J. Leahy, Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
John Ashcroft, Chair, Constitution, Federalism and Property Rights Subcommittee, Senate Judiciary Committee
Mike DeWine, Chair, Antitrust, Business Rights and Competition Subcommittee, Senate Judiciary Comittee
Representative Virgil H. Goode
Representative Barney Frank, House Judiciary Committee
Representative Christopher Cannon, House Judiciary Committee
Representative William Delahunt, House Judiciary Committee
Representative Elton Gallegly, House Judiciary Committee
Representative Bob Clement