(The material referred to follows:)

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF THE TREATY PROCESS ON DOMESTIC

LAWS

Cody Fowler, Esq., chairman, Fowler, White, Gillen, Yancey & Humkey, Citizens Building, Tampa 2, Fla.

E. J. Carroll, director, Economic Research, Sharp & Dohme, Inc., 640 North Broad Street, Philadelphia 1, Pa.

Dr. Edward S. Corwin, Princeton University, Old Stone House, Stockton Road, Princeton, N. J.

Col. William S. Culbertson, Culbertson Briggs & Pendleton, Stoneleigh Court, 1025 Connecticut Avenue, Washington 6, D. C.

Hugh Dean, vice president, General Motors Corp., General Motors Building, Detroit, Mich.

R. H. Glover, vice president and general counsel, Anaconda Copper Mining Co., 25 Broadway, New York 4, N. Y.

Dr. John N. Hazard, professor of public law, the Russian Institute, Columbia University, 431 West 117th Street, New York 27, N. Y.

William A. Hanley, vice president and director, Eli Lilly & Co., Post Office Box 618, Indianapolis 6, Ind.

Frank E. Holman, Esq., Holman, Mickelwait, Marion, Prince & Black, Hoge Building, Seattle 4, Wash.

A. D. Marshall, assistant secretary, General Electric Co., 1 River Road, Schenectady 5, N. Y.

Arthur Y. Milam, Esq., Milam, McIlvaine, Carroll & Wattles, Post Office Box 58, Jacksonville 1, Fla.

W. C. Mullendore, president, Southern California Edison Co., Edison Building, Los Angeles 53, Calif.

Dr. Leo Pasvolsky, director, International Studies Group, The Brookings Institution, 722 Jackson Place NW., Washington 6, D. C.

Sylvester C. Smith, Jr., general counsel, Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 763 Broad Street, Newark, N. J.

Samuel C. Waugh, president, The First Trust Co. of Lincoln, Nebr., Lincoln, Nebr.

Mr. RHYNE. It will be noted that most of these members are na tionally recognized experts in the field of international law. I think you will find that it is composed of about 4 businessmen, 4 experts in the field of international law, and 4 lawyers.

In reviewing the reasons why the members of the United States Chamber of Commerce adopted the above quoted declaration of policy I report the following:

The members of the United States Chamber of Commerce have watched with pride the great scientific achievements of recent years— such as the airplane, radio, and television-which have conquered the problems of distance and in a literal sense shrunk nations to neighborhoods. Coupled with their pride in these scientific achievements, howver, these members have experienced a growing alarm over the development, chiefly under the sponsorship of the United Nations and its specialized agencies of the idea that the distinction between domestic and international affairs has been wiped out. This alarm grew tremendously when nationwide attention was called to an official statement by the Department of State in 1950 that "there is no longer any real distinction between domestic and foreign affairs." (State Department Publication 3972, Foreign Affairs Policy Series 26.)

The great effusion of treaties designed to solve many of our unsolved domestic problems-as well as to offer new solutions to those for which solutions have been devised domestically-has gradually brought home to the businessmen of the United States that while they have in the past looked for regulatory law relating to their businesses

in local ordinances, State statutes, and Federal statutes, they now must focus their attention upon a fourth many-chambered legislative body, which is busy grinding out proposed "treaty" law. When our triplelayer governmental system has added to it this fourth branch the results can be startling in impact.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, are you referring there to ILO, or to the United Nations?

Mr. RHYNE. I am referringto the U. N. and its specialized agencies, which would include the ILO, the World Health Organization, and the other organizations which I mentioned a few pages on, Senator. Businessmen who have found difficulty in learning just what Federal regulations affect their business are even more baffled in trying to discover the provisions applicable to their business in the vast and uncharted field of treaty law.

I understand that the approximately 100 conventions of the International Labor Organization will be described in other testimony which is to be presented to this committee. Those treaties or conventions cover a vast multitude of domestic subjects of vital concern to businessmen, such as wages and hours, labor clauses in public contracts, safety provisions in the building industry, social security, compulsory health insurance, and almost every other conceivable interest of business.

Time permitting I could go into many other fields of vital concern to industry to point out things which alarm businessmen, but I will mention only two in the fields of aviation and copyright law. I believe they illustrate the dangers inherent in giving effect to treaties which override domestic law.

The International Civil Aviation Organization which has its headquarters in Montreal is busy developing new conventions and in rewriting certain existing conventions which have domestic as well as international effect in the field of air transportation, and, of course, most of these relate solely to and are essential to foreign air commerce. But some have drastic domestic effects. I cite as examples the Warsaw Convention which limits recovery for death or personal injury caused by an airplane crash. In the case of the Warsaw Convention a person can board an airplane in Los Angeles bound for London along with 50 other persons who are going to New York and if the plane crashes, the 49 domestic passengers may recover an unlimited amount for negligent injury or their survivors an unlimited amount for their death, but the person bound for London—even though the crash occurs through the negligence of the airline as the plane takes off from the Los Angeles Airport-cannot recover more than the $8,291.87 for injury nor may his survivors recover more than that amount for his death. They can recover more by achieving the almost impossible task of proving "willful misconduct."

I may say there, Senator, I have tried some of these Warsaw Convention cases. It is impossible for a jury to understand the instructions of nothing, $8,200 if the airline is negligent, and an unlimited amount if willful misconduct is proved. I tried one of those down here a week or so before the late Justice Goldsborough, and the jury got all fouled up. When they came in with a compromise amount, that was set aside immediately, and they settled it. But the thing about it is that I know of 4,000 claims that have been filed under that

convention, and only 2 in which you have received more than $8,200. I happened to have something to do with those 2 cases.

The Supreme Court of the United States has refused to disturb a decision holding this convention is self-executing and in full effect as domestic law. Lee v. Pan American Airways (300 N. Y. 761, 89 N. E. (2d) 258; Cert. Den. 339 U. S. 920).

The proposed Rome Convention provides that damage to persons and property on the earth's surface from crashes of airplanes on international flights would be limited drastically to limits ranging from $33,000 to $800,000, depending upon the weight of the aircraft. These amounts are so negligible as to be entirely unreasonable when one considers the possible total damage such an airplane could do. Some cities owning airports are up in arms against this proposed convention. They have airport buildings worth millions which are exposed to destruction by these aircraft, and $33,000 would not be even a meager start toward their reconstruction. Should such an airplane destroy a large factory or even a private home it is obvious that the limit is too low. True it is that the United States representatives have not yet signed this convention but the convention is complete and it is argued that the liability limits are high enough in foreign nations and the United States should not stand in the way of "progress" just because our standards of living and values are higher than in other countries.

There is in the works a proposed Universal International Copyright Convention which may vitally affect copyrights in this country. Some believe it could destroy copyright rights created under our Federal law by relegating them to a subordinate status. There are basic differences in the protection accorded copyrights under the governmental systems of other nations and our own laws on this subject. I may say, there, Senator, it is chiefly this right of automatic copyright that you secure under the Berne Convention, which you don't secure under our conventions here unless you file and give notice.

This work is being done by a committee under the sponsorship of the United Nations' Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization which is carrying on broad studies in the fields of education, science, and culture.

And I would also like to say, since there has been some reference here to the possibility of protecting our domestic rights by reservations, that the official text of this Universal Copyright Convention, which was signed, I am informed, by our United States Convention last December, in article 20, contains the most startling language I have ever seen in any international convention, and I have examined many of them. It is this: "Reservations to this convention shall not be permitted."

I don't think that there is another convention in existence where that particular language has ever been inserted, and of course, with that language there, all the talk about protecting ourselves through reservations goes out the window, because it is absolutely impossible. The CHAIRMAN. Would you make reference to that in the record, just where it can be found?

Mr. RHYNE. I would be very glad to present this copy for the record, because I think it is a rather unique document in that regard. The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

(The material referred to follows:)

UNIVERSAL COPYRIGHT CONVENTION

The Contracting States,

Moved by the desire to assure in all countries copyright protection of literacy, scientific and artistic works,

Convinced that a system of copyright protection appropriate to all nations of the world and expressed in a universal convention, additional to, and without impairing international systems already in force, will ensure respect for the rights of the individual and encourage the development of literature, the sciences and the arts,

Persuaded that such a universal copyright system will facilitate a wider dissemination of works of the human mind and increase international understanding,

Have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE I

Each Contracting State undertakes to provide for the adequate and effective protection of the rights of authors and other copyright proprietors in literary, scientific and artistic works, including writings, musical, dramatic and cine matographic works, and paintings, engravings and sculture.

ARTICLE II

1. Published works of nationals of any Contracting State and works first published in that State shall enjoy in each other Contracting State the same protection as that other State accords to works of its nationals first published in its own territory.

2. Uupublished works of nationals of each Contracting State shall enjoy in each other Contracting State the same protection as that other State accords to unpublished works of its own nationals.

3. For the purpose of this Convention any Contracting State may, by domestic legislation, assimilate to its own nationals any person domiciled in that State.

ARTICLE III

1. Any Contracting State which, under its domestic law, requires as a condition of copyright, compliance with formalities such as deposit, registration, notice, notarial certificates, payment of fees or manufacture or publication in that Contracting State, shall regard these requirements as satisfied with respect to all works protected in accordance with this Convention and first published outside its territory and the author of which is not one of its nationals, if from the time of the first publication all the copies of the work published with the authority of the author or other copyright proprietor bear the symbol accompanied by the name of the copyright proprietor and the year of first publication placed in such manner and location as to give reasonable notice of claim of copyright.

2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this article shall not preclude any Contracting State from requiring formalities or other conditions for the acquisition and enjoyment of copyright in respect of works first published in its territory or works of its nationals wherever published.

3. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this article shall not preclude any Contracting State from providing that a person seeking judicial relief must, in bringing the action, comply with procedural requirements, such as that the complainant must appear through domestic counsel or that the complainant must deposit with the court or an administrative office, or both, a copy of the work involved in the litigation; provided that failure to comply with such requirements shall not affect the validity of the copyright, nor shall any such requirement be imposed upon a national of another Contracting State if such requirement is not imposed on nationals of the State in which protection is claimed.

4. In each Contracting State there shall be legal means of protecting without formalities the unpublished works of nationals of other Contracting States.

5. If a Contracting State grants protection for more than one term of copyright and the first term is for a period longer than one of the minimum periods

prescribed in article IV, such State shall not be required to comply with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article III in respect of the second or any subsequent term of copyright.

ARTICLE IV

1. The duration of protection of a work shall be governed, in accordance with the provisions of article II and this article, by the law of the Contracting State in which protection is claimed.

2. The term of protection for works protected under this Convention shall not be less than the life of the author and 25 years after his death.

However, any Contracting State which, on the effective date of this Convention in that State, has limited this term for certain classes of works to a period computed from the first publication of the work, shall be entitled to maintain these exceptions and to extend them to other classes of works. For all these classes the term of protection shall not be less than 25 years from the date of first publication.

Any Contracting State which, upon the effective date of this Convention in that State, does not compute the term of protection upon the basis of the life of the author, shall be entitled to compute the term of protection from the date of the first publication of the work or from its registration prior to publication, as the case may be, provided the term of protection shall not be less than 25 years from the date of first publication or from its registration prior to publication, as the case may be.

If the legislation of a Contracting State grants two or more successive terms of protection, the duration of the first term shall not be less than one of the minimum periods specified above.

3. The provisions of paragraph 2 of this article shall not apply to photographic works or to works of applied art; provided, however, that the term of protection in those Contracting States which protect photographic works, or works of applied art in so far as they are protected as artistic works, shall not be less than ten years for each of said classes of works.

4. No Contracting State shall be obliged to grant protection to a work for a period longer than that fixed for the class of works to which the work in question belongs, in the case of unpublished works by the law of the Contracting State of which the author is a national, and in the case of published works by the law of the Contracting State in which the work has been first published. For the purposes of the application of the preceding provision, if the law of any Contracting State grants two or more successive terms of protection, the period of protection of that State shall be considered to be the aggregate of those terms. However, if a specified work is not protected by such State during the second or any subsequent term for any reason, the other Contracting States shall not be obliged to protect it during the second or any subsequent term.

5. For the purposes of the application of paragraph 4 of this article, the work of a national of a Contracting State, first published in a non-Contracting State, shall be treated as though first published in the Contracting State of which the author is a national.

6. For the purposes of the application of paragraph 4 of this article, in case of simultaneous publication in two or more Contracting States, the work shall be treated as though first published in the State which affords the shortest term; any work published in two or more Contracting States within thirty days of its first publication shall be considered as having been published simultaneously in said Contracting States.

ARTICLE V

1. Copyright shall include the exclusive right of the author to make, publish, and authorize the making and publication of translations of works protected under this Convention.

2. However, any Contracting State may, by its domestic legislation, restrict the right of translation of writings, but only subject to the following provisions: If, after the expiration of a period of seven years from the date of the first publication of a writing, a translation of such writing has not been published in the national language or languages, as the case may be, of the Contracting State, by the owner of the right of translation or with his authorization, any national of such Contracting State may obtain a non-exclusive license from the competent authority thereof to translate the work and publish the work so translated in any of the national languages in which it has not been published;