-CITE-

17 USC CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND

IMPORTATION 01/06/03

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 17 - COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPORTATION

.

-HEAD-

CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPORTATION

-MISC1-

Sec.

601. Manufacture, importation, and public distribution of certain

copies.

602. Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords.

603. Importation prohibitions: Enforcement and disposition of

excluded articles.

-SECREF-

CHAPTER REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS

This chapter is referred to in section 912 of this title.

-CITE-

17 USC Sec. 601 01/06/03

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 17 - COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPORTATION

-HEAD-

Sec. 601. Manufacture, importation, and public distribution of

certain copies

-STATUTE-

(a) Prior to July 1, 1986, and except as provided by subsection

(b), the importation into or public distribution in the United

States of copies of a work consisting preponderantly of nondramatic

literary material that is in the English language and is protected

under this title is prohibited unless the portions consisting of

such material have been manufactured in the United States or

Canada.

(b) The provisions of subsection (a) do not apply -

(1) where, on the date when importation is sought or public

distribution in the United States is made, the author of any

substantial part of such material is neither a national nor a

domiciliary of the United States or, if such author is a national

of the United States, he or she has been domiciled outside the

United States for a continuous period of at least one year

immediately preceding that date; in the case of a work made for

hire, the exemption provided by this clause does not apply unless

a substantial part of the work was prepared for an employer or

other person who is not a national or domiciliary of the United

States or a domestic corporation or enterprise;

(2) where the United States Customs Service is presented with

an import statement issued under the seal of the Copyright

Office, in which case a total of no more than two thousand copies

of any one such work shall be allowed entry; the import statement

shall be issued upon request to the copyright owner or to a

person designated by such owner at the time of registration for

the work under section 408 or at any time thereafter;

(3) where importation is sought under the authority or for the

use, other than in schools, of the Government of the United

States or of any State or political subdivision of a State;

(4) where importation, for use and not for sale, is sought -

(A) by any person with respect to no more than one copy of

any work at any one time;

(B) by any person arriving from outside the United States,

with respect to copies forming part of such person's personal

baggage; or

(C) by an organization operated for scholarly, educational,

or religious purposes and not for private gain, with respect to

copies intended to form a part of its library;

(5) where the copies are reproduced in raised characters for

the use of the blind; or

(6) where, in addition to copies imported under clauses (3) and

(4) of this subsection, no more than two thousand copies of any

one such work, which have not been manufactured in the United

States or Canada, are publicly distributed in the United States;

or

(7) where, on the date when importation is sought or public

distribution in the United States is made -

(A) the author of any substantial part of such material is an

individual and receives compensation for the transfer or

license of the right to distribute the work in the United

States; and

(B) the first publication of the work has previously taken

place outside the United States under a transfer or license

granted by such author to a transferee or licensee who was not

a national or domiciliary of the United States or a domestic

corporation or enterprise; and

(C) there has been no publication of an authorized edition of

the work of which the copies were manufactured in the United

States; and

(D) the copies were reproduced under a transfer or license

granted by such author or by the transferee or licensee of the

right of first publication as mentioned in subclause (B), and

the transferee or the licensee of the right of reproduction was

not a national or domiciliary of the United States or a

domestic corporation or enterprise.

(c) The requirement of this section that copies be manufactured

in the United States or Canada is satisfied if -

(1) in the case where the copies are printed directly from type

that has been set, or directly from plates made from such type,

the setting of the type and the making of the plates have been

performed in the United States or Canada; or

(2) in the case where the making of plates by a lithographic or

photoengraving process is a final or intermediate step preceding

the printing of the copies, the making of the plates has been

performed in the United States or Canada; and

(3) in any case, the printing or other final process of

producing multiple copies and any binding of the copies have been

performed in the United States or Canada.

(d) Importation or public distribution of copies in violation of

this section does not invalidate protection for a work under this

title. However, in any civil action or criminal proceeding for

infringement of the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute

copies of the work, the infringer has a complete defense with

respect to all of the nondramatic literary material comprised in

the work and any other parts of the work in which the exclusive

rights to reproduce and distribute copies are owned by the same

person who owns such exclusive rights in the nondramatic literary

material, if the infringer proves -

(1) that copies of the work have been imported into or publicly

distributed in the United States in violation of this section by

or with the authority of the owner of such exclusive rights; and

(2) that the infringing copies were manufactured in the United

States or Canada in accordance with the provisions of subsection

(c); and

(3) that the infringement was commenced before the effective

date of registration for an authorized edition of the work, the

copies of which have been manufactured in the United States or

Canada in accordance with the provisions of subsection (c).

(e) In any action for infringement of the exclusive rights to

reproduce and distribute copies of a work containing material

required by this section to be manufactured in the United States or

Canada, the copyright owner shall set forth in the complaint the

names of the persons or organizations who performed the processes

specified by subsection (c) with respect to that material, and the

places where those processes were performed.

-SOURCE-

(Pub. L. 94-553, title I, Sec. 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2588;

Pub. L. 97-215, July 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 178; Pub. L. 105-80, Sec.

12(a)(15), (16), Nov. 13, 1997, 111 Stat. 1535.)

-MISC1-

HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES

HOUSE REPORT NO. 94-1476

The Requirement in General. A chronic problem in efforts to

revise the copyright statute for the past 85 years has been the

need to reconcile the interests of the American printing industry

with those of authors and other copyright owners. The scope and

impact of the ''manufacturing clause,'' which came into the

copyright law as a compromise in 1891, have been gradually narrowed

by successive amendments.

Under the present statute, with many exceptions and

qualifications, a book or periodical in the English language must

be manufactured in the United States in order to receive full

copyright protection. Failure to comply with any of the

complicated requirements can result in complete loss of

protection. Today the main effects of the manufacturing

requirements are on works by American authors.

The first and most important question here is whether the

manufacturing requirement should be retained in the statute in any

form. Beginning in 1965, serious efforts at compromising the issue

were made by various interests aimed at substantially narrowing the

scope of the requirement, and these efforts produced the version of

section 601 adopted by the Senate when it passed S. 22.

The principal arguments for elimination of the manufacturing

requirement can be summarized as follows:

1. The manufacturing clause originated as a response to a

historical situation that no longer exists. Its requirements

have gradually been relaxed over the years, and the results of

the 1954 amendment, which partially eliminated it, have borne out

predictions of positive economic benefits for all concerned,

including printers, printing trades union members, and the

public.

2. The provision places unjustified burdens on the author, who

is treated as a hostage. It hurts the author most where it

benefits the manufacturer least: in cases where the author must

publish abroad or not at all. It unfairly discriminates between

American authors and other authors, and between authors of books

and authors of other works.

3. The manufacturing clause violates the basic principle that

an author's rights should not be dependent on the circumstances

of manufacture. Complete repeal would substantially reduce

friction with foreign authors and publishers, increase

opportunities for American authors to have their works published,

encourage international publishing ventures, and eliminate the

tangle of procedural requirements now burdening authors,

publishers, the Copyright Office, and the United States Customs

Service.

4. Studies prove that the economic fears of the printing

industry and unions are unfounded. The vast bulk of American

titles are completely manufactured in the United States, and U.S.

exports of printed matter are much greater than imports. The

American book manufacturing industry is healthy and growing, to

the extent that it cannot keep pace with its orders. There are

increasing advantages to domestic manufacture because of improved

technology, and because of the delays, inconveniences, and other

disadvantages of foreign manufacture. Even with repeal, foreign

manufacturing would be confined to small editions and scholarly

works, some of which could not be published otherwise.

The following were the principal arguments in favor of retaining

some kind of manufacturing restriction.

1. The historical reasons for the manufacturing clause were valid

originally and still are. It is unrealistic to speak of this as a

''free trade'' issue or of tariffs as offering any solution, since

book tariffs have been removed entirely under the Florence

Agreement. The manufacturing requirement remains a reasonable and

justifiable condition to the granting of a monopoly. There is no

problem of international comity, since only works by American

authors are affected by section 601. Foreign countries have many

kinds of import barriers, currency controls, and similar

restrictive devices comparable to a manufacturing requirement.

2. The differentials between U.S. and foreign wage rates in book

production are extremely broad and are not diminishing: Congress

should not create a condition whereby work can be done under the

most degraded working conditions in the world, be given free entry,

and thus exclude American manufacturers from the market. The

manufacturing clause has been responsible for a strong and enduring

industry. Repeal could destroy small businesses, bring chaos to

the industry, and catch manufacturers, whose labor costs and

break-even points are extremely high, in a cost-price squeeze at a

time when expenditures for new equipment have reduced profits to a

minimum.

3. The high ratio of exports to imports could change very quickly

without a manufacturing requirement. Repeal would add to the

balance-of-payments deficit since foreign publishers never

manufacture here. The U.S. publishing industry has large

investments abroad, and attacks on the manufacturing clause by

foreign publishers, show a keen anticipation for new business. The

book publishers arguments that repeal would have no real economic

impact are contradicted by their arguments that the manufacturing

requirement is stifling scholarship and crippling publishing; their

own figures show a 250 percent rise in English-language book

imports in 10 years.

After carefully weighing these arguments, the Committee concludes

that there is no justification on principle for a manufacturing

requirement in the copyright statute, and although there may have

been some economic justification for it at one time, that

justification no longer exists. While it is true that section 601

represents a substantial liberalization and that it would remove

many of the inequities of the present manufacturing requirement,

the real issue is whether retention of a provision of this sort in

a copyright law can continue to be justified. The Committee

believes it cannot.

The Committee recognizes that immediate repeal of the

manufacturing requirement might have damaging effects in some

segments of the U.S. printing industry. It has therefore amended

section 601 to retain the liberalized requirement through the end

of 1980, but to repeal it definitively as of January 1, 1981. It

also adopted an amendment further ameliorating the effect of this

temporary legislation on individual American authors.

In view of this decision, the detailed discussion of section 601

that follows will cease to be of significance after 1980.

Works Subject to the Manufacturing Requirement. The scope of the

manufacturing requirement, as set out in subsections (a) and (b) of

section 601, is considerably more limited than that of present

law. The requirements apply to ''a work consisting preponderantly

of nondramatic literary material that is in the English language

and is protected under this title,'' and would thus not extend to:

dramatic, musical, pictorial, or graphic works; foreign-language,

bilingual, or multilingual works; public domain material; or works

consisting preponderantly of material that is not subject to the

manufacturing requirement.

The term ''literary material'' does not connote any criterion of

literary merit or qualitative value; it includes catalogs,

directories and ''similar materials.''

A work containing ''nondramatic literary material that is in the

English language and is protected under this title,'' and also

containing dramatic, musical, pictorial, graphic, foreign-language,

public domain, or other material that is not subject to the

manufacturing requirement, or any combination of these, is not

considered to consist ''preponderantly'' of the copyright-protected

nondramatic English-language literary material unless such material

exceeds the exempted material in importance. Thus, where the

literary material in a work consists merely of a foreword or

preface, and captions, headings, or brief descriptions or

explanations of pictorial, graphic or other nonliterary material,

the manufacturing requirement does not apply to the work in whole

or in part. In such case, the non-literary material clearly

exceeds the literary material in importance, and the entire work is

free of the manufacturing requirement.

On the other hand, if the copyright-protected non-dramatic

English-language literary material in the work exceeds the other

material in importance, then the manufacturing requirement

applies. For example, a work containing pictorial, graphic, or

other non-literary material is subject to the manufacturing

requirement if the non-literary material merely illustrates a

textual narrative or exposition, regardless of the relative amount

of space occupied by each kind of material. In such a case, the

narrative or exposition comprising the literary material plainly

exceeds in importance the non-literary material in the work.

However, even though such a work is subject to the manufacturing

requirement, only the portions consisting of copyrighted

non-dramatic literary material in English are required to be

manufactured in the United States or Canada. The illustrations may

be manufactured elsewhere without affecting their copyright status.

Under section 601(b)(1) works by American nationals domiciled

abroad for at least a year would be exempted. The manufacturing

requirement would generally apply only to works by American authors

domiciled here, and then only if none of the co-authors of the work

are foreign.

In order to make clear the application of the foreign-author

exemption to ''works made for hire'' - of which the employer or

other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the

''author'' for copyright purposes - section 601(b)(1) provides that

the exemption does not apply unless a substantial part of the work

was prepared for an employer or other person who is not a national

or domiciliary of the United States, or a domestic corporation or

enterprise. The reference to ''a domestic corporation or

enterprise'' is intended to include a subsidiary formed by the

domestic corporation or enterprise primarily for the purpose of

obtaining the exemption.

The provision adopts a proposal put forward by various segments

of both the United States and the Canadian printing industries,

recommending an exemption for copies manufactured in Canada. Since

wage standards in Canada are substantially comparable to those in

the United States, the arguments for equal treatment under the

manufacturing clause are persuasive.

Limitations on Importation and Distribution of Copies

Manufactured Abroad. The basic purpose of the temporary

manufacturing requirements of section 601, like that of the present

manufacturing clause, is to induce the manufacture of an edition in

the United States if more than a certain limited number of copies

are to be distributed in this country. Subsection (a) therefore

provides in general that ''the importation into or public

distribution in the United States'' of copies not complying with

the manufacturing clause is prohibited. Subsection (b) then sets

out the exceptions to this prohibition, and clause (2) of that

subsection fixes the importation limit at 2,000 copies.

Additional exceptions to the copies affected by the manufacturing

requirements are set out in clauses (3) through (7) of subsection

(b). Clause (3) permits importation of copies for governmental use,

other than in schools, by the United States or by ''any State or

political subdivision of a State.'' Clause (4) allows importation

for personal use of ''no more than one copy of any work at any one

time,'' and also exempts copies in the baggage of persons arriving

from abroad and copies intended for the library collection of

nonprofit scholarly, educational, or religious organizations.

Braille copies are completely exempted under clause (5), and clause

(6) permits the public distribution in the United States of copies

allowed entry by the other clauses of that subsection. Clause (7)

is a new exception, covering cases in which an individual American

author has, through choice or necessity, arranged for publication

of his work by a foreign rather than a domestic publisher.

What Constitutes ''Manufacture in the United States'' or Canada.

A difficult problem in the manufacturing clause controversy

involves the restrictions to be imposed on foreign typesetting or

composition. Under what they regard as a loophole in the present

law, a number of publishers have for years been having their

manuscripts set in type abroad, importing ''reproduction proofs,''

and then printing their books from offset plates ''by lithographic

process * * * wholly performed in the United States.'' The language

of the statute on this point is ambiguous and, although the

publishers' practice has received some support from the Copyright

Office, there is a question as to whether or not it violates the

manufacturing requirements.

In general the book publishers have opposed any definition of

domestic manufacture that would close the ''repro proof'' loophole

or that would interfere with their use of new techniques of book

production, including use of imported computer tapes for

composition here. This problem was the focal point of a compromise

agreement between representatives of the book publishers and

authors on the one side and of typographical firms and printing

trades unions on the other, and the bill embodies this compromise

as a reasonable solution to the problem.

Under subsection (c) the manufacturing requirement is confined to

the following processes: (1) Typesetting and platemaking, ''where

the copies are printed directly from type that has been set, or

directly from plates made from such type''; (2) the making of

plates, ''where the making of plates by a lithographic or

photoengraving process is a final or intermediate step preceding

the printing of the copies''; and (3) in all cases, the ''printing

or other final process of producing multiple copies and any binding

of the copies.'' Under the subsection there would be nothing to

prevent the importation of reproduction proofs, however they were

prepared, as long as the plates from which the copies are printed

are made here and are not themselves imported. Similarly, the

importation of computer tapes from which plates can be prepared

here would be permitted. However, regardless of the process

involved, the actual duplication of multiple copies, together with

any binding, are required to be done in the United States or

Canada.

Effect of Noncompliance with Manufacturing Requirement.

Subsection (d) of section 601 makes clear that compliance with the

manufacturing requirements no longer constitutes a condition of

copyright with respect to reproduction and the distribution of

copies. The bill does away with the special ''ad interim'' time

limits and registration requirements of the present law and, even

if copies are imported or distributed in violation of the section,

there would be no effect on the copyright owner's right to make and

distribute phonorecords of the work, to make derivative works

including dramatizations and motion pictures, and to perform or

display the work publicly. Even the rights to reproduce and

distribute copies are not lost in cases of violation, although they

are limited as against certain infringers.

Subsection (d) provides a complete defense in any civil action or

criminal proceeding for infringement of the exclusive rights of

reproduction or distribution of copies where, under certain

circumstances, the defendant proves violation of the manufacturing

requirements. The defense is limited to infringement of the

''nondramatic literary material comprised in the work and any other

parts of the work in which the exclusive rights to reproduce and

distribute copies are owned by the same person who owns such

exclusive rights in the nondramatic literary material.'' This

means, for example, that the owner of copyright in photographs or

illustrations published in a book copyrighted by someone else who

would not be deprived of rights against an infringer who proves

that there had been a violation of section 601.

Section 601(d) places the full burden for proving violation on

the infringer. The infringer's defense must be based on proof

that: (1) copies in violation of section 601 have been imported or

publicly distributed in the United States ''by or with the

authority'' of the copyright owner; and (2) that the infringing

copies complied with the manufacturing requirements; and (3) that

the infringement began before an authorized edition complying with

the requirements had been registered. The third of these clauses

of subsection (d) means, in effect, that a copyright owner can

reinstate full exclusive rights by manufacturing an edition in the

United States and making registration for it.

Subsection (e) requires the plaintiff in any infringement action

involving publishing rights in material subject to the

manufacturing clause to identify the manufacturers of the copies in

his complaint. Correspondingly, section 409 would require the

manufacturers to be identified in applications for registration

covering published works subject to the requirements of section

601.

AMENDMENTS

1997 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105-80, Sec. 12(a)(15), substituted

''nondramatic'' for ''nondramtic''.

Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 105-80, Sec. 12(a)(16), substituted

''substantial'' for ''subsustantial'' before ''part of the work''.

1982 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97-215 substituted ''1986'' for

''1982''.

-TRANS-

TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS

For transfer of functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of

the United States Customs Service of the Department of the

Treasury, including functions of the Secretary of the Treasury

relating thereto, to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for

treatment of related references, see sections 203(1), 551(d),

552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department

of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as

modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

-SECREF-

SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS

This section is referred to in sections 409, 602 of this title.

-CITE-

17 USC Sec. 602 01/06/03

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 17 - COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPORTATION

-HEAD-

Sec. 602. Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords

-STATUTE-

(a) Importation into the United States, without the authority of

the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords

of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an

infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or

phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501. This

subsection does not apply to -

(1) importation of copies or phonorecords under the authority

or for the use of the Government of the United States or of any

State or political subdivision of a State, but not including

copies or phonorecords for use in schools, or copies of any

audiovisual work imported for purposes other than archival use;

(2) importation, for the private use of the importer and not

for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one

copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time, or by any

person arriving from outside the United States with respect to

copies or phonorecords forming part of such person's personal

baggage; or

(3) importation by or for an organization operated for

scholarly, educational, or religious purposes and not for private

gain, with respect to no more than one copy of an audiovisual

work solely for its archival purposes, and no more than five

copies or phonorecords of any other work for its library lending

or archival purposes, unless the importation of such copies or

phonorecords is part of an activity consisting of systematic

reproduction or distribution, engaged in by such organization in

violation of the provisions of section 108(g)(2).

(b) In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords

would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title

had been applicable, their importation is prohibited. In a case

where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United

States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their

importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable.

In either case, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to

prescribe, by regulation, a procedure under which any person

claiming an interest in the copyright in a particular work may,

upon payment of a specified fee, be entitled to notification by the

Customs Service of the importation of articles that appear to be

copies or phonorecords of the work.

-SOURCE-

(Pub. L. 94-553, title I, Sec. 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2589.)

-MISC1-

HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES

HOUSE REPORT NO. 94-1476

Scope of the Section. Section 602, which has nothing to do with

the manufacturing requirements of section 601, deals with two

separate situations: importation of ''piratical'' articles (that

is, copies or phonorecords made without any authorization of the

copyright owner), and unauthorized importation of copies or

phonorecords that were lawfully made. The general approach of

section 602 is to make unauthorized importation an act of

infringement in both cases, but to permit the United States Customs

Service to prohibit importation only of ''piratical'' articles.

Section 602(a) first states the general rule that unauthorized

importation is an infringement merely if the copies or phonorecords

''have been acquired outside the United States'', but then

enumerates three specific exceptions: (1) importation under the

authority or for the use of a governmental body, but not including

material for use in schools or copies of an audiovisual work

imported for any purpose other than archival use; (2) importation

for the private use of the importer of no more than one copy or

phonorecord of a work at a time, or of articles in the personal

baggage of travelers from abroad; or (3) importation by nonprofit

organizations ''operated for scholarly, educational, or religious

purposes'' of ''no more than one copy of an audiovisual work solely

for archival purposes, and no more than five copies or phonorecords

of any other work for its library lending or archival purposes.''

The bill specifies that the third exception does not apply if the

importation ''is part of an activity consisting of systematic

reproduction or distribution, engaged in by such organization in

violation of the provisions of section 108(g)(2).''

If none of the three exemptions applies, any unauthorized

importer of copies or phonorecords acquired abroad could be sued

for damages and enjoined from making any use of them, even before

any public distribution in this country has taken place.

Importation of ''Piratical'' Copies. Section 602(b) retains the

present statute's prohibition against importation of ''piratical''

copies or phonorecords - those whose making ''would have

constituted an infringement of copyright if this title has been

applicable.'' Thus, the Customs Service could exclude copies or

phonorecords that were unlawful in the country where they were

made; it could also exclude copies or phonorecords which, although

made lawfully under the domestic law of that country, would have

been unlawful if the U.S. copyright law could have been applied. A

typical example would be a work by an American author which is in

the public domain in a foreign country because that country does

not have copyright relations with the United States; the making and

publication of an authorized edition would be lawful in that

country, but the Customs Service could prevent the importation of

any copies of that edition.

Importation for Infringing Distribution. The second situation

covered by section 602 is that where the copies or phonorecords

were lawfully made but their distribution in the United States

would infringe the U.S. copyright owner's exclusive rights. As

already said, the mere act of importation in this situation would

constitute an act of infringement and could be enjoined. However,

in cases of this sort it would be impracticable for the United

States Customs Service to attempt to enforce the importation

prohibition, and section 602(b) provides that, unless a violation

of the manufacturing requirements is also involved, the Service has

no authority to prevent importation, ''where the copies or

phonorecords were lawfully made.'' The subsection would authorize

the establishment of a procedure under which copyright owners could

arrange for the Customs Service to notify them wherever articles

appearing to infringe their works are imported.

-TRANS-

TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS

For transfer of functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of

the United States Customs Service of the Department of the

Treasury, including functions of the Secretary of the Treasury

relating thereto, to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for

treatment of related references, see sections 203(1), 551(d),

552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department

of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as

modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

-SECREF-

SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS

This section is referred to in sections 501, 511, 603 of this

title.

-CITE-

17 USC Sec. 603 01/06/03

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 17 - COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 6 - MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPORTATION

-HEAD-

Sec. 603. Importation prohibitions: Enforcement and disposition of

excluded articles

-STATUTE-

(a) The Secretary of the Treasury and the United States Postal

Service shall separately or jointly make regulations for the

enforcement of the provisions of this title prohibiting

importation.

(b) These regulations may require, as a condition for the

exclusion of articles under section 602 -

(1) that the person seeking exclusion obtain a court order

enjoining importation of the articles; or

(2) that the person seeking exclusion furnish proof, of a

specified nature and in accordance with prescribed procedures,

that the copyright in which such person claims an interest is

valid and that the importation would violate the prohibition in

section 602; the person seeking exclusion may also be required to

post a surety bond for any injury that may result if the

detention or exclusion of the articles proves to be unjustified.

(c) Articles imported in violation of the importation

prohibitions of this title are subject to seizure and forfeiture in

the same manner as property imported in violation of the customs

revenue laws. Forfeited articles shall be destroyed as directed by

the Secretary of the Treasury or the court, as the case may be.

-SOURCE-

(Pub. L. 94-553, title I, Sec. 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2590;

Pub. L. 104-153, Sec. 8, July 2, 1996, 110 Stat. 1388.)

-MISC1-

HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES

HOUSE REPORT NO. 94-1476

The importation prohibitions of both sections 601 and 602 would

be enforced under section 603, which is similar to section 109 of

the statute now in effect (section 109 of former title 17).

Subsection (a) would authorize the Secretary of the Treasury and

the United States Postal Service to make regulations for this

purpose, and subsection (c) provides for the disposition of

excluded articles.

Subsection (b) of section 603 deals only with the prohibition

against importation of ''piratical'' copies or phonorecords, and is

aimed at solving problems that have arisen under the present

statute. Since the United States Customs Service is often in no

position to make determinations as to whether particular articles

are ''piratical,'' section 603(b) would permit the Customs

regulations to require the person seeking exclusion either to

obtain a court order enjoining importation, or to furnish proof of

his claim and to post bond.

-REFTEXT-

REFERENCES IN TEXT

The customs revenue laws, referred to in subsec. (c), are

classified generally to Title 19, Customs Duties.

-MISC2-

AMENDMENTS

1996 - Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104-153 substituted a period at end

for ''; however, the articles may be returned to the country of

export whenever it is shown to the satisfaction of the Secretary of

the Treasury that the importer had no reasonable grounds for

believing that his or her acts constituted a violation of law.''

-CITE-