| richlevy |
07-12-2009 03:07 AM |
The 'work for hire' affair was a fiasco which demonstrated the reason that there should be and now is a ban on individuals being hired as lobbyists for a certain period after leaving Congress.
Quote:
The work-for-hire amendment passed without hearings or debate*10 on November 29, 1999, the last day Congress was in session, in an appendix to an appropriations bill of over 1,000 pages.*11 The amendment is one sentence found within the appendix in a title regarding satellite transmission of copyrighted television content.*12
The section in which the work-for-hire amendment appears bears the label "Technical Amendments"*13 and the legislative history calls it a "clarifying change."*14 These characterizations belie the significance of the amendment and explain why no debate occurredtechnical amendments usually correct spelling, punctuation, or numbering without changing the substantive meaning of the law.*15 If Congress had held hearings on the subject, artists would have informed Congress that the work-for-hire amendment was not a mere technical amendment, but instead a significant piece of legislation with major consequences-namely the elimination of artists' termination rights.*16 Before "clarifying" previous legislation Congress also should have considered that a United States District Court had reached the exact opposite conclusion in interpreting the same legislation just six months earlier.*17
While Congress appears to have been unaware of the detrimental impact that the work-for-hire amendment would have on artists, the RIAA must have understood the amendment's significance for record companies.*21 Billboard reports that "the RIAA has tried to attach the item to various copyright bills for several years."*22 Further, Billboard reports that "[the amendment] was not requested by any member of Congress. Instead, it was apparently inserted into a final conference report of the Satellite bill by a congressional staffer at the request of the RIAA."*23
|
The legislative staffer who inserted the 'technical adjustment' into the Satellite bill at the request of the RIAA was Mitch Glazier. When Congress found out about the amendment after voting the bill into law, they had to repeal the law, since the 'adjustment' was actually a significant change which would result in artists losing the rights to their work permanently. The repeal was unanimous. Mitch left town 3 months later.
As for Mitch Glazier, he's doing just fine
Quote:
Mitch Glazier is Senior Vice President, Government Relations and Industry Relations, of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the trade association representing the $14 billion U.S. recording industry. RIAA members, including hundreds of record labels, create, manufacture and/or distribute 90 percent of all legitimate sound recordings in the United States. Mr. Glazier serves as the chief advocate for the recorded music industry before policymakers and government officials.
|
Quote:
Prior to his tenure at the RIAA, Mr. Glazier served as Chief Counsel to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives. The Subcommittee has jurisdiction over all intellectual property law, including patents, copyrights and trademarks. In his capacity as Chief Counsel, Mr. Glazier served as the chief adviser to the Subcommittee and was responsible for working with members of Congress to craft legislation and amendments, organize legislative and oversight hearings and markups, and analyze and evaluate legislation referred to the Subcommittee.
|
No conflict of interest there, huh?:right: |
