>> i will go out on a live a little better. hathaway who is the head of research choose the most knowledgeable of the

failures of the startups sector of the one in the world i would direct you to him. but what i do know from the data is there is a large regional component. not just to the u.s. but also very strong in the united states where you find failures in the bay area like san francisco is frequent but fargo were outside of that. if it is the market you're interested in but with those survival rates they tend to be a lot greater. there is a regional component. what are the actual cultural drivers and have that help you to determine fiscal policy. so what we like to look at is one of the scary things

is in putting capital into zero markets that attract talent it is very difficult. said you have to hire them for a very long time and with a very specific skills said eliminates your ability to change your stage of growth with any degree of success so that means there is capital infusion. vc will be set up to lose their money so in europe it is with the european governments should be far more worried about than they are but that will be happen looking at employment and regulation there. >> i have failed at the question and answer portion because by panel is too

interesting. [laughter] you can come up and ask him in person. think you for coming. enjoy the rest of ces. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon and welcome to the national press club. i am a reporter so i cover jus' rotation and the 106 president of the national press club. we are the world's leading professional organization with the events such as this of fostering a free press worldwide.

for more information please visit our web site at press.org. on behalf of our members worldwide ever like to welcome our speaker today and those of you in the audience. our head table includes guest of our speaker as well as working journalist to our club members. if you here applies no to that members of the general public also attending so it is not necessarily evidence of lack of journalistic object to the. [laughter] , also like to welcome our public radio in c-span audience you can follow the action on twitter #npclunch. now for our guests please

stand president and ceo of national railroad passengers [applause] editor of real business. [applause] secretary treasury of the afl-cio. senior editor of the journal of commerce. [applause] president and ceo of the association of american railroads. [applause] finance and investigative reporter and center for public integrity. [applause] skipping over our speaker, president and member of the committee to organize today's lunch. thank you.

[applause] to executive director of new jersey transport. [applause] washington correspondent -- correspondent for the record [applause] and professor of media studies at georgetown university. [applause] >> our guest today is not criticize about the hand that feeds him saying depending on rail is insufficient to the point that we are eating grass has alive. joseph boardman president and chief executive officer since 2008 last year the board said it was so happy with its work if they would extend his contract by another two years.

writer ship has risen to a record 30 1.2 million. mr. boardman told congress and amtrak covered 80% of its operating costing gained passengers on all routes even long-distance trains that traditionally hamper the bottom line it with the bush administration tried to cut. the brookings institution report said it had increased 85% of ryder's ship more than doubled the growth from the aviation sector. that is nowhere more clear than the corridor that has gained traffic from the airline shuttle. on a good day they can complain about spotty wife fiat war on bad days they could be stranded for hours when e equipment fails in winter weather. prior to his appointment

that mr. boardman was a booster of the federal railroad administration regulating safety for a contract and all others in the united states. before dash he served as commissioner of the new york state department of trees rotation in 1997 ready was the organization mont is serving commissioner is served in the u.s. air force began in 1968. he enrolled at cornell university where he earned the decree would expect for someone bound to be a the dissertation leader. bachelor of science of agricultural economics. [laughter] mr. boardman is in the news to prevent crashes. he said congress should should, teacher in the entire industry must redouble their commitment to provide funding to implement

as soon as possible. also a proponent of improving the transportation infrastructure that the federal government must increase capital investment for a new traffic control system rebuild bridges and highways and expand water raised and other types of critical infrastructure such as our electric grid and assume wages systems for the we talk about that today in a speech entitled bringing transfer station funding into the 21st century. please join me now to have a warm national press club welcome president and ceo joseph boardman. [applause] >> thank you angeles, i am pleased to be here today with my friends as i look across the audience. to introduce one other person who replaced three as

the administrator from the fra, thank you for being here today. [applause] angela, i started the first part of his speech that i joined the air force and a celebrated my birthday 18 years old by having a drink than later when i turned 21 i could vote. [laughter] that is reversed today. so in three weeks i became 65 years old and i told mike good friend that i am now an old man. he said no. 65 is not told. i am 67. i am not old. [laughter] that is reversing a as well.

there are other things that need to be thought about. with the most recent discussion that we have the future of surfaced as rotation focused on any of the reauthorization. that is unfortunate because the highway across fund is dead financially and viable but perhaps more importantly i believe it is built on the out moated issued for mobility and united states. we need to think about how to replace it with service to its tradition programs for the 21st century by asking ourselves what the purpose of the program should be. what we wish you accomplish and how legal structure the program to produce a coherent transportation policy. i saved we need to start here because when i look at

today's destroyed to collection of federal troops for tuition programs, i cannot find rational answers to these questions and as they say, if you don't know where you're going, good luck getting their. it is clear to me that people no longer know what they are buying when they ask for support of federal chiseler station investment and that confusion is justified. what is that we're out to do? maintained the network network, improve it, expand it? i will talk today about what i think we should do with our federal transportation program and how amtrak could fit into it. to start we have to finally replace the notion of the highway program with the notion of a surface transportation program. it is not easy.

we started 20 years ago if you remember been restarted to talk about a intermodal to dissertation. -- choose rotation. their responsibilities in new york. even if you like your residents to answer the phone dot you got highway department. because they think about as saw highway department not as the dot not for what we need to do. we need a motive neutral program to provide investment projects to deliver real results rather than simply invest on the basis of a historical perspective. we needed balance program that can provide information on any surface mode highway, transit or real freight or passenger shackle

from simply chasing lou restricted dollars instead ask them to produce results that matter to the nation. what are those? a new focus on national priorities that must be the guiding principle of the federal service transportation program. the overarching objective of of the structure and press misspeak the economic future because we have a new global marketplace and to build a program we need to change the debate as leaders and pay our debt to the future and hope is the industry on promoting economic growth and help keep our great

country moving for. small dash forward. i have been president since november 2008 just over five years ago. but at the time support since that time partners with women and men that work for amtrak have achieved some impressive accomplishments despite the recession and slow growth of recovery. we set writer ship records tentative 11 years and carried three times as many passengers between new york and washington as all airlines put together. when is the last time you heard somebody say they just flew in on the shuttle? revenues are 21% and now covering 89 percent of our operating cost vs. 88%. it is a great time to be an amtrak.

i'm happier growth indices continue to rise but the fact of the matter is we're constantly being asked by everyone, a rural communities, to the nation's biggest cities to deliver more and better service. state and local leaders see it as a way for economic development of finding ways to invest in their local train stations many towns are seeking to become an amtrak service community. bus service is gone comair service is goning communities are starving for tangible transportation that can impact their lives and in many key respects transportation has converse for many americans. and more expensive. they want to see that tied

it difficult turn. it is not a new track problem but a national problem and symptomatic of the declining emphasis we're putting on national connectivity in recent decades. we have become myopic not understanding the need for united vision of the united states. many of the same challenges the domestic capacity falls 20% since 2005 and half of the airline flights on routes of less than 500 miles have been discontinued since 2005 and heading small communities hard making it difficult for them to grow or even to business outside of town and its. under these circumstances you might think strengthening national connectivity between our communities in economic centers would be a national priority but if he thought back, you would be wrong.

we're not really making the investments we need for growth and improvement just barely keeping the existing system growing. amtrak, like everyone else tries to keep pace but it is a challenge. cramming more into the existing infrastructure to squeeze out more at of the equipment. almost a 4 million miles the new voters cannot come fast enough. missing the rail growth opportunity is what happens when that occurs. congress and the administration will take up reauthorization of service transfer station. i have seen that from almost every side the only thing that maybe in to lift out i also have a pilot's license

in droves of us through college. [laughter] guided begin my career in small cities in upstate new york that i manage my own company throughout the state of new york it as the commissioner to his rotation i of pluses responsible for all facets of tears for tissue with the third largest the in the country. when i was a kid it was the largest but that has changed as well. but my biggest responsibility was building and maintaining economies. responsible for the rail system for rail policy to oversee federal funding to amtrak in as president i spent the last five years figuring out what capital investments amtrak needed to make to operate safely, and maintain the northeast corridor to meet the growing

national demand always without knowing how much money i would have the next year. or in the current year to meet all those needs. these experiences have given the perspective of the challenges and i would like to offer you some of i thought someone i have seen it or what i think needs to be done. the highway trust fund established in 1956 to pay for was our country's greatest transportation and gold, the construction of 47,000 my rail interstate highway system. authorize 1944 but the genesis maybe the tripp eisenhower bade in 1980 within the army convoy at 5 miles per hour could road

move with have fallen to the '20s and '30s greatly improved but they follow the trails that the choppers made before but the interstate system was the new kind of growth bill and finance on a national scale to take it vintage of the mobility trucks in cars could provide after six decades of development at an unprecedented scale. originally funded by the appropriations in the gas tax that pulled revenue from the highway trust fund to leverage a multi decade program. today the highway trust fund is dead. what we think of is the user fee funded single load trust fund has not existed for many years. construction of interstate highway system was completed

by 1982 and we have expanded funding eligibility but today it pays mostly for maintenance of 220,000 miles that a quarter of which is part of the 47,000-mile highway system. local transit was made eligible for funding 1992 but inner-city public transportation is still not eligible. user fees alone for cover the cost of the highway trust fund since 2008 congress has spent more to bail out was general revenue than it spent on amtrak's during his 42 years of existence. without intervention intervention, projected deficits continue to grow. a cbo study concluded the shortfall will grow from 7 billion in 2015 to about one and a 26 billion by

20203, eight years from now. the two-year stopgap all of the federal surface transportaion program expires this year to give us an opportunity to create a new framework for a publisher is rotation investment and we need to think about it. there is major issues pending. the shortfall numbers, a 126 billion don't include things america needs. for example,, the recent proposal by the reason foundation to create the interstate 2.o a system to address construction -- congestion and issues would cost nearly $1 trillion and they think that needs to have been within the next two decades. if we treat the issue as

what do we do with the existing structure we will all lose. nothing worthwhile will change. the question we must answer is how do we redefine the approach to federal transportation investment to make sure it is focused on truly national needs? how do we recapture the interstate era? first of all, forget about the notion of the highway trust fund. the america of the future will not prosper on the backs of the highways are airports are railroads, of world leading economy today requires the world's leading transportation system. of a new trust fund must be loaded neutral that strengthens full network to

support the unique roles but each plate to support interstate commerce interconnected id. second to in the context of limited revenue the trust fund must be focused to make investments international in scope and generate policy outcomes the nation needs. may be that certain things that are funded today should not or cannot be funded in the future by the federal government if they lacking specific national purpose. not to say they're not worthwhile. that is not enough to ask ourselves whether certain investments are worth making. that is the easy way out. but what investment is the federal government responsible for? moreover what investments is

the federal government uniquely suited to provide? in my view the fundamental purpose of federal transportation investment is to connect this mission together and provide for interstate commerce. that was the vision of our founding fathers of and the constitution in the vision behind the highway trust fund. it is a vision we have lost today. only the federal government can address this for connectivity only the federal government has the responsibility for providing the national perspective. the share rise or fall on their merits with every program, every investment we must ask in answer howard provides for national connectivity and other national priorities but how would addresses the fundamental responsibility

we should not be afraid of the notion anyone who knows anything about transportation in those subsidy is ubiquitous as part of the business because of a car boot -- public at large derives benefits from strong transportation network and that is how the national highway system was sold in 1992. the key is making those subsidies as small as necessary to deliver brodeur long-term value the need to reauthorize federal surface transportaion program and amtrak whose authorization expired last year provides an opportunity for us to ask what will do we want the federal government to play an federal infrastructure investment how to reformulate national policies to achieve the outcomes we need to meet the challenges with the 21st century economy?

if national outcomes are our goal i believe investments have a home in amtrak better redefine to well targeted federal surface transportaion program but that is up for the policy makers to decide now what is best for amtrak some may think redefining our approach the produce winners in the losers with that is the wrong way to think about it. the right way is a tool to produce outcome to make torrey says that go deeper because it is the way we have always done its. we have a lot of concerns about the course we are on we have seen government's ability to make targeted effective investments has declined. other people have noticed that to in their confidence has declined along with it.

the people out there customers, constituents want us to deliver relevant infrastructure solutions we are a mixed group the weekend at the backstop. we have a challenge, one that we cannot afford to dodge or neglect we have to improve our reality rather than try to explain it. we're facing a rail challenge of bankruptcy with the highway trust fund is just the tip of the iceberg but if we're willing to work together to solve it we must devise a forum where the rights debate can be framed to. a lot be easy but in good faith weekend find a way through to give america what it needs to help us restore the trust that must return from the appropriate level

of investment from our nation's infrastructure needs. we have spent a lifetime in this business o this to a better and stronger system we owe it forward. i believe we can do a and we must. thank you. [applause] >> former chess cretaceous secretary raised the hood calls for raising the gas tax bite $0.10 a gallon in indexing to inflation that is not the message she was delivering wine year ago as secretary. [laughter] but within that context of that conversation this week

would you think needs to be done in terms of the highway trust fund as a pot of money? doesn't need to be larger? >> i knew that question would come. i thought about it i think really where we are today when i talked about in my speech was the reason foundation thought this ought to be done for those of you that looked at it. the rail question is why are our priorities going to be? how will we decide what to do for the future? the highway trust fund should not be reached trusted by the surface transportation trust fund to talk about us being a global competitor. i will stop answering but we get a lot of criticism about not having high-speed rail

or this or that in the nation but we don't do anything about it except talk about it. brady to improve our reality and find a solution to a global competitiveness for to his petition -- transportation. >> is increasing revenue through the gas tax or other means a solution? >> the state's need to make changes they are finding solutions for the problem because the leadership is not coming from the federal government if it understood its responsibility but is to connect the nation together for stand foremost the connectivity of this nation is what drove the interstate highway system the connectivity of our small towns to the big towns is critical in this nation to.

>> states are raising tolls of the private partnership should the federal government follow the lead of the state's? vindicated to require amtrak to go out to tell the states they had to have a greater will how they would finance and that has that no cayenne there are some suggestions to do that on a national basis with passenger rail but that is not okay because that is a federal responsibility that is what we have united states for. >> how would you handicap the highway bill this year as long as chances for reauthorization? can they move independent of each other? >> i see them as linked to

because that is what i want to see is the surface transportation in program. that to occur long time even to get there it was not just a quick analysis of for two years but for amtrak two years would be a major improvement if you don't know half next year or this year it is harder to do a multifaceted program which is what is needed. we have a commission in defined the work that needs to be done we cannot build a tunnel in three months you cannot rebuild the bridge where do the things we are being asked to do with a commitment level b are receiving. you need to bring in all together to have this mode neutral solution. freewill offering quell in that area.

i.r.a. electrical grid is imported water is important those that we need to get done we need to get it done. [applause] >> why shouldn't the votes compete for funding? you're asking for more money for planes and highways. why? >> we become stronger in the globe if we work together to balance our transportation system so it does bring this better economic development and connects our people. >> you noted amtrak has increased up that 89 percent you see that rising higher or how high can that go?

>> it depends on who writes the next speech. [laughter] i am kidding. i do see it in increasing but at the same time but we will see relatively soon is the investments we are taking in new equipment will begin to cost as many as the revenues that we have today will be used to pay off debt and not used to give back to the federal government. >> is there a goal of 100 percent? >> for the whole system highway into aviation or just amtrak? every singling that back out again? [laughter] i think we can be profitable above really where we have been deaf writers and where we can price the product we kim price said today i know that we ought to have the

way for students and in my discussion i began to explain we're at capacity so that make a bus in the bus system that provides those services to students is an important part of the balance i was in the bus business they are subsidized even without a government check every time they use the interstate highway system what is his al there already for police the communities paid for those sale be paid for that cost as a railroad. >> given the current strains of that fiscal environment what ideas to propose to reduce amtrak operating cost how do welcome competitive contracting? period we have a new contractor up in boston as of yesterday there was a

decision to move to a new commuter rail operator. one remove from that was amtrak a few years ago. reduce see there is a competitive environment out there in the commuter rail business we step back substantially from that except for where it really makes sense for amtrak to operate where it owns the rail road bike in maryland or connecticut surface that we provide and if you whether places a really want amtrak but we cannot operate as cheaply as a company coming in this is a french company because it set up a small company with the liability is not the same and the cost is not the same cell in those areas they will compete with us. with other areas he would

not have that competition because of the huge investment and the liability we have to cover. >> deity appropriations run out in six days what happens with the amtrak or if there is another extended government shutdown? directly lost writer ship so we don't want that to happen because we do provide quite a bit of writer ship. i don't think that will happen but that is part of the federal level of lack of commitment to what we have to get done but i was not kidding when i said i think we owe more debt for for them backward because we have benefited greatly from the investments made in this

country when i lived in washington d.c. in 1966 there is only part of the way i could get on the interstate highway and had to get off to go to the city but now that does not have been anywhere. of the investments were made we have gained what we need for the future not to worry about those things because what they really need to worry about where are there kids and grandkids going to be the freedom make them for the future to allow them to be a part of the global economy. we will be of short. >> innovators like you have proposed new means of transportation are you working with him or other visionaries? >> i would like to get the

existing trades replaced so they don't break down with a higher level of reliability so the job that we do well gets done even better. it is important to have these ideas. i enter stand. i am not critical but there is a huge cost ended change of culture we don't have the culture today even to deliver a single surface transportation program that we can have decisions made on a more neutral basis. >> what is the prognosis of a new tunnel under the hudson river to take traffic off a bridge or maybe to new jersey? [laughter] >> i promise that blood not come up to but i do angelo would get there.

the prognosis is it has got to be done. if sandy talked us nothing else when there is water in the tunnels you cannot move trains or people in free need greater redundancy if we remain the financial capital of the overall? we better be more serious about that to build the tunnels and build the gateway program to make sure there is space for trains that just keep coming in to york. no question in today we have to make these investments. we have to find solutions part of that is the federal government. >> governor christie is talking a lot about

transportation is now the time to get him on board? [laughter] >> pass. [laughter] [applause] said the passengers this week in the northeast were stuck countries for hours or were prevented entirely because trains were cancelled a lot of problems with the overhead wires can you talk about what was different this time? cold weather happens ag period and what does this tell us about our infrastructure? >> it is not just the northeast we had a lot of problems in the midwest and one number trade number six ran into a 20-foot snowdrift fair trade went to rescue them was stuck in another snowdrift we just depend on the freight railroads to

help us out and they did. they moved us substantially. we've received tons of compliments about our conductors i mentioned her name she will be red-faced, andrea the conductor on train number six was outstanding person to deliver for her customers. the interesting thing is what about this trade that was stock? people are telling you how well you're handling these problems from those that are there but the way it is reported it sounds like we have the other major problems. we have managed and women in this country that deliver every single day and while they are not perfect they are responsible for the success that we had ended is the weather that happens the past couple of weeks that

you really get to know who was worth their salt the and we have a lot of from that are. in problems of the northeast corridor that we call hardware incidents breakdowns are happening more into more every year most of the wire problem was south of new york because north of new york was built in the '90s instead of the weight used to be tied into on the south end back in the '30's for is too old so we have more and more breakdowns there needs to be rebuilt of the entire system. >> is there a price tag for that? >> yes. [laughter] >> what is it? [laughter] >> edward rather they'd give

it to you i will provide that. i don't have the numbers but it is not cheap. >> airlines have a legal obligation to accommodate misplaced passengers when the flight cancels amtrak does not have a comparable mandate. should there be? gimmickry do try to take care of our customers when something like that happens so we have a system in place but if there should be a mandate some would think so but one of the things we did do was give as early a notice as we could so they would know they could not travel sometimes there of the tracks for a couple of days before we know we will be that bad so why do was

help their? it left the west coast a couple of days ago there was not this problem expected. it is a little different than the flight that hops over for a couple of hours in manhandling train traffic >> airlines have heard extra cash by charging for seats with checking luggage and more legroom. the also have multiple surface glasses and charge a large premium but with amtrak being more crowded in sold-out is this something amtrak is considering? >> we look at those how we could raise revenue with my discussions we talked about there was the desire to reduce fares rather than

increase but to look at what is happening and revenue management level we are looking for the opportunity to increase revenues that is why there is a revenue increase of 21% because we're managing our revenues very differently today then we have in the past. looking at other opportunities as well with 55 new baggage cars so we get the request for handling different objects in is the bill for us to be handling pets at this time. there are opportunities coming forward to the future of rail look at elasticity ratio was to increase with the revenues to the

customers to see with david be interested to pay. >> with amtrak customer surface was steps will you address inconsistent levels characterizing sometimes wonderful sometimes bureaucratic. >>. >> i think everybody in this business has that problem to some extent but it is not an excuse. we are looking at how do we provide the training training, incentives but what he what within the surface business is those who gain from the surface itself but somebody who wants to provide surface to begin with so we tried to figure on how to select and hire the right people up

front to be sure we provide a surface. the other thing that we found there brings up the larger issue is i was thinking as you said your the 106 president of the national press club by of the 106 president of amtrak because that is what has happened with 42 years scientists second long disserving president was a little over five years so think about the average change occurring with the flavor of the month so one of the issues i had to look at how do i get people to understand we want a safe rail road or a better bottom line?

there are all sorts of things even the process or with women and men that you work with you want them to be happy how you give good customer surface to you don't give a good employee relations? the values that help their so we need a strategic plan for what we know it is important including understanding you made the debt forgiveness to move onto the next level that has helped us but we don't have the consistency we would like to have for customer surface dobie are still working and it. >> what about food?

a frequent passenger says the quality of food is subpar at best how tough is it to serve a decent sandwich that does not look like it was shrink wrapped. >> i like the food. [laughter] it takes so long time to go from new york to washington that is generally how wide travel than new york to albany and i park so i can drive over to rome because there is not enough surface west of albany. have you heard that? i usually eat on the train i eat hamburgers i like their hot dogs. i like amtrak food even on the one distance trade --

trains even this panini. i am okay with that going myself. [laughter] but people are focused trying to improve food and we like to make sure that happens. >> what about skycaps they must be costly where competitors don't have them how long can they be justified at amtrak? >> the redcaps get their workout they finally learned not everybody wants to go to eric track someone to go to the bus and that was not part of the deal. some people absolutely need help with the baggage what they've wanted to recede as the important part of customer surface on the train.

>> we have a bunch of questions of long-distance surface. comment on the significance of those routes in the context of the legislation and you hope to see. >> we served over 500 stations in the united states. over 300 have no other surface they an amtrak. buses are gone, aviation cutback and we are the public transportation. if you are somebody who is my age with grandchildren eric your grandchildren are on one coast or the other you can probably get somebody to drive 10200 miles to the amtrak

station and except for two routes that are three days a week that trade will go by their westar north or south or east every day and you can depend on it. it might be a little late but you can depend on its. [laughter] it depends of the river road gets us there on time. [laughter] but you can depend on the you cannot depend on that neighbor to drive you a hundred miles to the coast where grandchildren are the post office if you look at the top next to union station it says connector of

scattered families. of the words may be wrong but the country was growing they reduce the post office to connect popery do that today we connect scattered family is across the nation in our major part to bring connectivity to the united states. coast to coast border to over border into canada to deliver what this nation needs and has forgotten about those people that don't have those services speaking how would you characterize amtrak's who wishes to put the freight railroad to date especially with the implementation? >> i think it's think its readership is excellent we have very good partners they have a lot of pressures because they have to downsize and away to make

themselves more competitive. may be of little further then they knew that they needed to. so they have to pick up services now especially with some of their new traffic. we have good relationships. we don't want to pay them as much as they've want to increase the number of routes we want to provide but that is part of the bargaining. but when we are in trouble they are there for us. we found that with a scene in the in the latest storm storm, we don't agree with everything but what else is new? we have good relationships with our freight railroad. >> what about high-speed bullet -- high-speed rail that nobody wants to pay for it but do you see a future

for the high-speed passenger rail in the u.s.? connected alison wright that question? we were talking about that. high-speed rail depending on how you phrase that we are already compared to the international association of railroads we're already doing that the largest majority of our operation in the northeast corridor is 125 miles per hour or 150 miles per hour if you are fighting the cela. it is about the time its reliability that people can depend on the railroad. they wanted on the time all the time. we also believe that if we do get debra road built it

will pay a substantial amount of money for us for the railroad business to invest in more in the future. it is a positive. . .

expect the investment to be made for the future. you're not going to get this multi-year effort to occur for high-speed rail the less we start thinking about a surface transportation program for the future that delivers that kind of multi-year contract authority said. contacted party is critically important for transportation mode. let me tell you what that is if you don't know what it is. if i were to touch on it. that is what ifs has gained us the ability to do multi-year, multi faceted projects. in new york once we knew that we had an environmental program or project, the environmental process done, we knew we were going to build it because we

knew that the way the money was going to come. no such thing exists for rail. as a matter of fact to weigh in our effort to lick high speed rail for the northeast corridor we need to do an environmental study which is what fra is doing right now, looking at that for the future purchase. so if you do is some money for the future, they need the will to build it. >> we are unfortunately all loss of time. before asking you one last question and have a couple of housekeeping matters. i would like to remind you about our upcoming speakers and january 15th. kristine lagard, managing director of the imf and the mary smith to the head of the nfl players association set. secondly, i would like to present mr. boardman with our traditional of national press club coffee mug. [applause] >> thank you very much.

>> thank you. [applause] >> no money. >> none. one last question. many folks consider anthrax twitter feed one of the best out there. how did they get started, who started it, and how you think it is benefiting your passages? chair. >> my daughter, julia, stand up. [applause] says. >> they keep. thank you. for coming today. thank you to each of you in the audience. of all selected the national press club staff including a journalism is did in broadcast center for helping organize. finally, you can find more permission of the national press club our website.

>> wednesday morning live from the british house of commons. that is at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span2.

>> you myself as a low profit from the message. trying to situate myself. the ada came to me when i was giving first some lectures at the u.s. air force academy in color as brings. and it was looking after me, having lots of jets. then he told me he was a liberal correct in my mind apart from the media that the u.s. air force academy, full of strange to radical, biblical fundamentalists. three tell me was a liberal and free from immigration.

but, he said, when people come to this country they should learn the nation's language. in that did not think he was speaking about comanche. so i quite agree. everyone should learn spanish sauce. >> the settlement and evolution of the united states from a spanish perspective, our american seven added to:00 eastern and 9:00 on after words, part of book tv of c-span2. an online and book tv, you still have time to show weigh in on the liberty amendment to or read the book and turn the conversation. gutted booktv.org and click on book club into the chat room six. >> admiral mike miller spoke at an event hosted by the group concerned veterans of america. topics include in this a leaker in recent, the national debt and national-security. here's a look.

>> actually, what is first arcade-12 education system because certainly in my life we have been talking about peace of problems with it for a good 20, 30 years. biological is in bad shape and it is almost like, there is a parallel to the debt issue in the sense that you have to have resources to invest for the future, and if you don't you're not going to have much of a future. we have to have an education system which is functioning at a very, very junior, very, very -- at the beginning, if you will, because i think a competitive advantage of america has right here. if we invest in that we will be okay. the continues to erode we're just not going to be competitive

. you cannot, at least sometime in the education sector, you can that scale charter schools to the public school system and the country. i don't know what the answer is. and what it believes he have to do this to teachers. they were the most impeccable people in my life. as a kid among coaches and parents and the best wrists, and that think somehow we have to channel that. we don't pay them very well. a tougher year after princeton, and that it not run it there. that does not mean that there aren't any, but it is not the path that so many cheese because it is not valued in the country's dominant equity to turn that around or, again, this very slow erosion will wake up one day and wonder what happened . the third thing is the political have been in washington knows this is the mid-90s.

as friends, historians, well, some are quick to say we have been through this before. about a year ago i questioned and said kamal well, when, 1938 to 39. so that was overly uplifting in that conversation, but about a year ago as the same question of another story in. he said, well, we have. the civil war. so the point is, this is tough. think everybody knows that. i don't know how. i worry that we will continue to dig the hole, if you will. i helped set six somehow, you know, the of the country can figure out a way to get us moving in a much more positive direction before we have some catastrophic event. that piece concerns me a great deal. the fourth is cyber. i will talk much about it, but it scared me to death.

and understand how capable it is , how lethal the potential this, not just from a securities and bid to get a perspective, but let's relief from a national perspective, it was capable of shutting down our great, our financial system, impacting significantly our logistics'. it almost as the advantage. i thought the target incident over christmas says the with the initial reports were 40 million, it would to 70 million, is big to the scale of the capability and the several world, that many that quickly. let's talk about in terms of leaders need to understand this. you have to have them. line leaders make decisions on people and investments and policies. so that is of a huge concern tsk. we are not doing well for our veterans sphere.

just because i was chairman, i focus not exclusively, but heavily. they're coming back to us very, very tough the employment of members. the economy is bumping along in getting a little better. hiring them throughout the country is difficult. their unemployment numbers are about 18 to 24 year-old about twice the national average. half of the married, the need to put food on the table. i am not convinced you can do from washington, quite frankly six. what i have tried to do is engage local leaders the communities throughout the country. someone has got to lead in an urban or rural community to customize support for veterans focusing on health, education, and employment so that remember that they have been extraordinary. typically there to-income

families, so they have huge capabilities that they can offer superior find this sea of goodwill out there. you just the local leaders to galvanize that. and then we have seen pretty significant progress, but i would be worried notionally that they're coming home, leaving the military at about a thousand a day, which is normal, and we are hiring of them and a bottle when hundred per day. better than it was in vietnam and better than the past and many days, but we are just beginning. as we come out of afghanistan america did not have to buy into these wars since. america does not have a stake in these wars. combat troops are out and america will accelerate. giving visibility to this and making sure this young groups, did it for a few decades, and sell they are the best and will make a difference in the future.

i see them by the thousands. there will make a huge difference. that is why spend a lot about every time six. >> you can see this event in its entirety and 7:30 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. ". >> said a hearing last week and copyright protection. the hearing focused on what material can be protected her copyright law fiske. this is two hours and 35 minutes. >> did morning, ladies and zealand. the subcommittee will come to order. without objection the chair is to authorize to declare a recess that any time. well, our witnesses at low and our opening statements. phosphine this morning the subcommittee will continue its review varnishes copyright laws by hearing testimony concerning

what is within the scope of copyright protection. witnesses will present contrasting views of three important copyright issues among the making available to let broadcast people the ticket with additional laws and how fast they are protected under the copyright law. i and others have worked to bolster our copyright laws and protect local broadcasters whenever possible. i have also advocated that these have been generally laced with common-sense. cummins says it seems is an ingredient that is sorely missing some terms on capitol hill staff. all of us are guilty of that. maintaining these philosophies has become complicated. policy an infringement are

concerned this commit we have repeatedly heard testimony about file sharing. disturbing to hear that judges were uncertain of how to respond to this crisis. employees to lie on the one of our witnesses has updated his copyright treatise and made it perfectly clear that making available copyright works for others is infringement. that being said, yeah want to steal his thunder from this morning's testimony since then encourage all members, especially those who have bought focused on these issues in the past to carefully consider today's testimony. in closing, i think our esteemed panel of witnesses for participating today said that a fork to your remarks. i am not pleased to recognize distinguished and one from michigan. by the way, this is our first meeting. there will not be a military they and the side of the judiciary gile offer. good to have the. >> thank you and good morning

says to the chairman and the members of the committee. very small number of witnesses that we have before us this morning say for a very important subject. the hearing today provides an important opportunity for us to consider various provisions of copyright law and to examine whether the laws continue to adequately protect creators and promote innovation and let the developing technologies that were not contemplated when these provisions originally enacted six. to that end there are several factors that we should keep in mind. for example psst, the making available right which gives copyright owners exclusive right to authorize the manner in terms to make the cuts it available to the public. i favor strong copyright

protection because the benefits creators and promotes innovation in economic growth. strong copyright protection laws also help create a marketplace for content that viewers will enjoy as well as the latest technology that can be used to watch the consent. in making available right is especially important today where one copy of of work over the internet without authorization can provide access to millions of users around the world. the making available helps prevent infringing conduct. for those reasons we do not need to change a copyright law for the making available right. existing law already includes a making available right. i don't believe that there is any ambiguity.

seven federal appellate courts of them recognize the making available right six. in addition the united states is a party to various international agreements since that requires signatories to implement the making available right. congress has repeatedly demonstrated by ratifying these agreements that the united states law already includes this right and notes changes necessary. in any case, as least study this issue we should consider guidance from the copyright office. into that and our former colleague and ranking member of this subcommittee sent a letter to that agency last month asking if the steady, the current state of the making available right and to make recommendations. and in particular when need to know how of american consumers fair under current law in the context of digital on the

mansion's missions such as peer to peer networks, streaming services, and music down months. additionally we need to know how the competitiveness of u.s. technologies can be strengthened and the marketplace under international treaties excuse to preserve. in conjunction with the testimony we received today this report should provide as the valuable guidance. secondly, the evolution of technology has said a major impact on the debate for about copyright protection for broadcast and has generated many unresolved legal issues. just last friday the supreme court granted sanctuary in the case with the nation's largest

television broadcasters have brought suit against area, a streaming video service. this decision could have a wide-ranging impact but into a streaming chemical of computing color and the television industry. whenever the out come of this case i believe the law must avoid any added consumer ratifications, including higher fees and restricted access. to be clear, fast moving forward in this copyright review we must ensure that creators are protected, star projection, consumers continue to enjoy the works that the fire culture and literature lives. i think the chair for his on these issues and look forward to further collaboration on the theory that thank you. >> i think the gentleman.

i now recognize distinguished gentleman from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. appreciate you holding this hearing in a want to welcome all of our witnesses in this capacity crowd in the audience to a hearing on the topic it goes to the art of copyright law what is the scope of copyright protection. the committee will hear testimony of three related issues. the first concerning making available right seems to be settled by the u.s. the exception to two separate blood but trees in 1988. however, uncertainty in several file sharing cases and those using the library case in the tenth circuit in which the pay was released almost three seal. a vote -- lilac door to the thoughts of professors zimmer and lenny on prior jurisprudence and whether congress should bring greater clarity this fundamental issue of copyright law. the second issue concerns the scope of copyright protection

for broadcast. although the u.s. is not a party to the convention to ongoing discussions in geneva could result in additional copyright or other protection for broadcasters in an effort to deter a signal theft. broadcasting is a significantly since the room convention was signed in 1961 it be smart phones with and always on internet connection now make everyone in this room a broadcaster in ways that were unimaginable 50 years ago. i look forward to hearing from professor schultz and mr. love on this topic. finally, we will hear about an issue that has received less public attention and the other two sets but is one that does go to the heart of how our system and tracks of the government and was the subject of the very first copyright case heard by the supreme court in 1834 so. copyright protection for laws, codes, and standards appears to clash of the fundamental ability of our citizens to know what laws and regulations set been

misled by. it is fortunate the number of states seeking to claim copyright protection tsks despite longstanding use of the contrary has sharply declined. however, the issue of copyright protection for codes and standards incorporated within and is more nuanced recognizing that they are developed at some expense by private sector entities combined record territory representative of the american national standards institute an individual who is a greater access to it in operation including videos of congressional hearings like these his longstanding mission. before i conclude, let me turn to a few other issues not being heard today. there is no one in this room who is not aware that the supreme court announced on friday it will hear oral arguments later this spring in the area case regarding another issue related to the scope of copyright, the

public performance right. the court also announced it will hear oral arguments in two cases with implications for the patent trial issue, something this committee in the house is already addressed. these three intellectual property cases are in addition to earlier patent cases taken up only a few months ago was a justice of. it is hard for me not to notice that once again this committee continues to lead the way when critical policy issues. wanted thank the what this is where their time here today and further flexibility in their schedules to enable them to be here. thank you, mr. chairman. >> they key, chairman. we have a distinguished panel commended will again prove a who was wearing when this is a sphere. of the sweat testimony you're about to give us the truth teller whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you god. thank you. let the record show that all responded in the affirmative

says. >> mr. chairman in order for to have this in the record canasta unanimous consent to put documents into the record so that they can be copied? >> without objection costs. >> they keep. will you take all of them? >> without addiction. >> a few puffs. chairman good lot mention a standing-room-only crowd which shows me a you have been more than casual interest in this issue this. our first witness today is mr. david zimmer a professor at the ucla school of law and then attorney in private practice offs. in addition to the numerous books and articles on the estate and international copyright law he has updated and revised says. he received his ged from the school of law and a is emmy with

distinction and honor. our second witness, a professor at tulane university school of law worried teaches courses on intellectual property unfair competition and contracts says. turning his ged from stanford school of law in his bs from texas a&m university and also argued in economics from tulane while teaching at the law school . i witnessed today, southern illinois university. senior scholar at the center for the protection of intellectual property at george mason university school of law. receiving both his ged, international economics.

..

set

of the right that belong to copyright owners. one of the rights is public distribution. the question today is how to prove violation of the right. specifically does the act of placing a additional file containing a copyright work in to a file sharing folder on the internet violate the law? or must the copyright owner additionally prove that a third party downloaded that particular file before the uploader can be held responsible. in short, does copyright laws, distribution right include a making available component? let us imagine a user uploads a full copy of the motion picture avatar to a share folder operated bay peer-to-peer service. anyone else on the p2p network can watch "avatar" at no charge. i suggest the action is to reaffirm the existence of a making available right so the unthorsed upload i.t. is

considered infringing. the alternative is to force the copyright owners to prove that third parties subsequently downloaded that particular copy of avenue carr. -- "avatar" nap clogs judicial procedures and threatens user privacy. and the u.s. joined two treaties that require this country to recognize that right. unfortunately, nonetheless, there have been divided rulings on the subject from the district court. altogether there's one recent ruling from the 109th circuit recognizing making available right. there is still, as that court recognizes, discensus in the court. for that reason, i urge congress to reaffirm the making available right aspect of the copyright owner's distribution right. a brief history helps to frame the issue.

reverlting to the mid 20th century. the copyright act in effect gave owners the exclusive right to publish or vend the copyrighted work. someone who make a work assessable to the public was therefore fringe we are no further proof needed. we imagine a bookstore in '50s featuring numerous copy of a best seller stacked on a table, the case against the store owner was complete. it imposes no obligation to place undercover agents near the cash register to develop evidence that third party customers walked out with copy of the book in hand. translated to today's vernacular. they enjoyed the exclusive right to make available the protected work. they could have hired investigators to stand in the corner and record every transaction. that exercise was considered unnecessary. it should be considered equally

unnecessary today. rather than the private eye unobtrusively watching the cash radiology steer to watch books. proof of counseling is far more invasive. such subpoenas are multiplied 1 10,000 fold. we have seen case after case confronting challenges to these type of subpoenas. the entire exercise can and should be avoided. as opposed to extensive motion practice over subpoenas, or digital dragnet designed to ensnare the identity of everyone who uses the peer-to-peer service there's a more straightforward option. continue copyright law on trait additional path by holding liable those who make work available to the public without the copyright owners' permission. ideally litigation procedure

should be stream lined. the result case need not delve in to intricate questions on who counsel -- downloaded on the work on each day. the first is recat brags of strag story candles that deters up loaders from the infringing activities but not through the possibility of billion dollar reward as a present. the second is establishment of a form of small claims court. to consider routine peer-to-peer cases and award those appropriately reduced damage after liability has been established in a fair and expedited proceedings. these reform will not solve all the problems. but they will set the law on a reasonable course designed to protect the interest and to safe guard user privacy interest on the internet.

>> i acknowledge you. the texas football team was not -- bowl host in the recent football. i'll hold you harmless. good to have you with us, sir. >> thank you, committee chair. i'm sorry they were not polite to your team in the bowl game. maybe not that sorry. [laughter] it was a good game. if you didn't stay until the end you missed something pretty exciting, didn't you? so i'm here and probably have the hardest task of the witnesses up front. the first point i would like to to the committee that file sharing may not be the secure it's been made out to be. not discouraged of american culture or business. second point i would like that make is even if it were, the making available right not going to solve the problem. and the third disappoint, if we add the making available right

using a linguistic framework we see in the treaty act we're going reopen at lough what seemed to be fairly settled issues on the internet. with respect to linking, cloud competing, social networking. these things resolved framework. if you add a vague right it's make available to the public will have to re-litigate all over again. i think that's a problem. for me there's a difference between copying and stealing. stealing is basically wrong. and we should prohibit it whenever we find as a general rule. copying, on the other hand, is generally a good thing. it's not just the best thing since sliced bread. we wouldn't have it without it. i can speak to you today and you can understand what i'm saying, or at least i hope, because you and i speak the same language. we speak the same language we are born with the ability to hear or see what another speak

or does and imitate that. copying is a attribute. it make our civilization possible. when i look at file sharing, i don't see a scorch of culture i see an invention put music in the hands of more americans than any invention than the phonograph. i'm told it puts the hands of the americans without them paying for it. this is the real problem. it's a problem for i economy, jobses are loss. it's a problem for the creation of music. people not getting paid why remain in the business? when we think about those problems, for me, at least, the jobs argument is reflecting are very old fallacy that congress identified since 1950. that money is not lost, it doesn't go out of the economy. the fact consumers don't have to pay it for music it remains in the pocket and they invest tells where in the economy and the jobs are created elsewhere in the economy. there are still american jobs. there's no loss on the jobs front. with respect to the creation of music, this is goes really to

the heart of copyright. it's fundamental premise for 2300 years and if the goal of copyright is produced more and better works the progress of science and file sharing doesn't seem to be interfering with that at all. maybe you don't accept my perspective on that particular issue. it's not quite made out to be. let move on to the second point, making available right not going enable to solve the problem. it's not the silver bullet.

the point here is basically this. whether so you to prove a make available or prove a distribution. the way you do it is to download the work from the file sharing program. in the distribution context you may have to download it to show it a distribution was made. in the making available you center to downtown work to prove the link really is to the work it says it is. things on the internet are not what they say they are. it may surprise members of the committee. you have to download it to check and make sure it's the work. the practical matter there's no real difference here. from 2003 to 2008 the music industry sent command letter they went after 35,000. estimates suggest there might be 35 million americans. it was never realistic to go

after all of them. the final point is it's going reopen a lot of what seemed to be settled issues, investment in in new technologies. thank you. >> thank you. >> chairman, chairman, rajiving member, and member of the subcommittee. i appreciate the chance to speak with you. today's subject, the scope of copyright is the right place to start a detailed of the copy right act. the subject matter of copyrights should be one of the least controversial part of copyright. because it goes to the heart of itself justification. today i'll be speaking on my own behalf as a copyright lawyer and scholar.

i'll speak first about the scope and subject matter of copyright general and specifically address how these principles apply to protection for broadcast. copyright had a broad scope. for a good reason. it protects the productive intellectual labor of authors provided that those labors result in an original expressive work. it exists to provide those who create invest in and commercialize content the chance to enjoy the benefits of what they create through exclusive rights. when creators can benefit from the labors, the public also benefits. many speak of striking a balance between the right of copyright owner and the interest of the public, in truth, those interests are rarely out of plan. at least with respect core copyright principles such as the scope and subject matter of copyright. james madison recognized the fact from the federalist paper when he said of intellectual property that the public good

fully coincides with the claims of individuals. the public will get the works to educate, entertain, and inspire and inform them. only if they're creators can obtain just company situation. recognize the core vawm those who invest labor and risk capital to create and distribute original content deserve protection of the property rights.

and incentive creators and broadcasters by free riding on the labor and investment. the second purpose the law has been a success. we have a i did nam ib in which the right of individuals and the public good are both promoted. here a few examples. there are nearly 1400 full-power commercial broadcast television in the united states. 87% of american get the news from local tv daily including important emergency news. nearly 60 million people still depend exclusively on over the air signals including 30% of households with annual incomes under $30,000. broadcasters air over 90 of the top 100 most-watched programs. perhaps more than anything, the

quality of modern programming shows that the public is well-served bit current system. unfortunately, many under estimate the substantial investment required to make it happen. the airways may be viewed as a public resource, but privately created broadcast systems and the program transmitted over them are not. local broadcasters maintain companyive facility and invest in new technology including billions in the recent shift to high-definition broadcasting. they pay network affiliation fees. in an era of shrinking news budget, the average local news operating budget is a welcome exception of over $4 million a year on average. >> conclusion there's no such thing as free lunch. they need protection of the property rights that make this tremendous enterprise possible. in this context, it's clear that

the public good as madison said about the intellectual property laws generally fully coincide with the claim of individuals. thank you. thank you. mr. love. >> thank you, mr. chairman. for the opportunity to testify. i've been asked to the broadcast organizations including proposals for a new u.n. treaty that would establish a set of neighboring or related rights for -- that distribute information. they did not create an do not own. the u.n. agency responsible for development of intellectual policy right policy known as the intellectual property organization or wipo for short. located in geneva it has a standing committee on copyright-related rights known as the sccr. since 1998, the sccr has been

trying to obtain consensus on a -- self called far diplomatic con friday on this treaty in 2015. it there are major differences among countries regarding every important aspect of this treaty as evidence from the current working document sccr/24/10. and the new proposal table during negotiation in december 2013 the treaty create a new layer of rights that coexist with copyright. benefiting the organizations that broadcast information the broadcasters and several member states such as japan, and member states of the european union are pressing for an agreement that expand scsh belie a set of related right that exist in a 1961 treaty. the united is not signed.

the 1961 rome convention created a system of related rights for performers and sound recordings. to supplement protections. 1961 a decision was made to give them a lair of rights as a reward for the role as an intermediary. more consider it a mistake. it provided by energy that play no role in the creation of the content i.t. the united states did not sign the convention but does provide some broadcasting energy with limited retransmission rights through the communications regulation system including through 47use325.

several countries want to expand the convention beneficiary to include nonfree subscriber channels. provided by x m sirius and rights in content they disrupt but did not create. a grow of number of countries want to expand the system. and expand the economic right to the more broadly defined group of broadcasting energy and provide for 50 years of exclusive right on fixations of broadcast. establish a new to, quote, authorize the simultaneous or near simultaneous retransmission of the broadcast prebroadcast

over any median, end quote. it includes the internet but in the u.s. proposal no post fixation rights. so far no country has voiced support for the u.s. proposal. much more aggressive alternatives from japan of the european union are being considered. that provide new exhibition rights to broadcast the for distributing information they did not create or own. it's a.name giving amazon or barnes & noble a layer of copyright in every book they sell. oar making google a part owner in every web page they let on internet. they face some unique challenges regarding retransmission of the signals. the u.s. pto proposal may be appropriate to address some of the channels. here we have an open mind. but for pay services and web casting, >> is no need to create

new intellectual property right dealing retransmission, copyright. theft and service laws, contracts, or sufficient to address piracy. for all broadcasting organizations, in is no economic justification for giving a distributer any right of the underlying content. it does not make sense and it creates a number of brave risk for those who create works in the public to create rights for people that distribute information that lay on top of the underlying interest you have in copyright. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, ladies and gentlemen. as noted my name is patricia griffin.

most people don't know how much we depend upon standards to ensure everyday life work. for example, standards help ensure that it fits in the socket that you can use any atm in the machine in the world and that products on store shelves are safe. in the united states, our standardsization system is lead by the private sector with hundred of individuals standard developing organizations or sc, working in different technical area in the sector. it's a consensus-based and market driven process that open to participation by all effective stake hollywooders. importantly the u.s. government is one such stakeholder and federal, state, and local government are active partner in the develop of standards and codes when the activity is relevant to their needs. the government uses the standards in a variety of ways including to establish internal procedures and develop regulations for public safety and welfare. our national standardization

system and the public/private partnership are reflected in the national technology transfer and advancement act of 1995 and the associated omb circular a119. the ntaa districts agencies to consider the use of private sector developed standards in lieu of the government unique standards been developing a voluntary consensus standards to a regulation federal agencies are permitted to incorporate the standards by reference in to the federal register. without publicly indication of the standards itself. for standard to be incorporated by reference, or ibred, the agency must determine that the standard is reasonably available to the class of person achghtsed by the anticipated regulation. in this case reasonably available has always meant that the standard is assessable to any potential user. it does not require that the standard be available without a fee. recently concerns have been raised about whether the reasonably available requirement

should be challenged. in light of expectations of free online access. for example, in early 2012, nara, the national archive and record administration solicited comment on a petition arguing that ibm material in the cfr should be for free. just three months ago, after a comprehensive analysis, they concluded that reasonably available continues to mean just that. it does not mean for free. they relied in large part on another comprehensive analysis of the issue conducted by them. the administrative conference of the united states in december of 2011. the question they were trying to answer was simple. why shouldn't the standards be free if it seems like a vailed point. but the blanket statement that all ibr standards should be free misses important consideration. every standard is a work of authorship under u.s. and international law copyright

protected giving the owner certain rights and control that cannot be taken away without just company situation. disrupts the ecosystem. the funding has to come from somewhere. increasing participation fee to offset loss sales revenue disfranchise those with the money have all the influence. if they can't afford to stay in business, safety standards would not updated and what is the answer. they should continue to make standards and codes available on the reasonable basis. for some it may mean providing read only but free access. and for others it may mean

reasonable prices. recognizing there is not one solution to the access issue they found it is for the federal agencies too continue to work with the sco to provide reasonable access to ibr standards. the recent assessment reaffirms the decades-old guidance contained in omba19 are 119 when copyright work are ibr they should not lose the copyright that is being done. and some make certain standards and codes available online on a read-only basis. for its part they launched a online ibr portal for the benefit of the user community including consumers. in closing the standardization community believes as omb believe the dwo. complex, highly

specialized technical standards requires a massive investment of time, labor, expertise, and money. standards develop in this country is one of the earliest and most successful example of the public public/private partnership. thank you very much for the opportunity to testify for you today. and i would be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. ranking member. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i'm the founder of public.resource.org a nonpost that puts government data bases that everybody agrees are public on the internet and works closely with government to help them improve their own operations. i'm responsible for placing the fcc edgar and u.s. patent data bases on the internet for the first time. public resource has put all the historical opinions of the u.s. court of appeals on the internet

for the first time. we worked with speaker boehner and chairman issa to put a full archive of -- and 14,000 hours additional hearings online. i would like to highlight three key points. first, there's a fundamental principle of our democracy. the rule of law. that states if we are to be empire of law and not of men we must publish the government for all to know. ignorance of the law is no expense and inform citizen i are must educate i.t. on the rights and obligations. that the law has no copyright because it is owned by the people. it's a principle repeatedly reaffirmed by the court. despite that principle, my non-profit has received stern take down notices for publishing the official codes of georgia, idaho, and mississippi. at the federal level, the code of federal regulations

deliberately and ex-- explicitly have become binding law. as joe the president of the american national standards institute clearly states, a standard that has been incorporated by reference has the force of law and it should be available. my non-profit has assembled a collection of 1 sthowrks a public safety laws. we have made them available to the public for the first time on the internet. for that service, 3 standards boy bodies are suing us for, and i quote, massive copyright infringement. they are suing us for publishing the law without a license. my second point, is about money. some standards bodies insist that before one can read or speak the law, one must first obtain their permission. they say everybody needs a license because they need the money. but the goal of their process is precisely the safety codes

become the law. they lobby aggressively for that outcome and they boast loudly when the codes are adopted when is a safety codes become law, the publisher gets a gold seal of approval of the american people. they exploit that position by selling all sort of ancillary services such as membership, training, and certification. the business has become incredibly lucrative and the non-profit standards body pate ceo million dollar salaries. my third point is that the right to read the law and speak the law is necessary for innovation. innovation that leads to better tools for those that use the law every day including government workers, electricians and plumbers, students, and apprentices, volunteer firefighters, journalists, and citizen. mr. chairman, i have here for the committee's inspection 20 public safety standards that are part of federal law.

including the safety requirements for wooden and metal ladders, the safety requirements for protective footwear, the national fuel and gas code. if you were to read these laws in to your hearing recording with could the congress face strident objections for speaking the law without a -- that's is why 115 distinguished law professors have joined me in calling on this committee to consider an e dicks of government amendment to the copyright act to clarify once and for all that the law belongs to the people. thank you very much. >> i want to commend the withins. you have complied with the five-minute rule. we thank you for that. we'll try to respond accordingly. mr. schultz, what changes you as law would you --

broadcaster concerns about signal theft. would these be to our copyright law or communications law? >> thank you. that's an excellent question. the law as it currently stands serve well. as i testified it serves both the public interest and serves broadcasters well. there are current developments that could change that. regulatory proceedings and a number of other court cases. this stand the law is remarkably well. indeed even conceivably joining a new broadcast treaty would not require us to change the law. thus the current statutory scream works well and i'm not aware -- i don't speak on the