Howard Coble

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I want to say to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], my good friend, I did not mean to mislead, when he said that the manager's amendment did not address all of his problems, what I said was that it addressed them either precisely or exactly or in spirit. And I think that is probably an accurate statement, although the gentleman's amendment did go a little farther than during the discussion.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we will talk about that another day. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Barcia].

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the Chair the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant]. (Mr. TRAFICANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I also express my appreciation to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde] of the Committee on the Judiciary for having introduced this bill and the committee of jurisdiction for having expeditiously handled it. During my time in the Congress, a little over a decade now, I served with Carlos Moorhead and with the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde], the chairman, on the Committee on the Judiciary and served with Carlos Moorhead during the years that he was the ranking Republican and during the term when he served as chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property. Oftentimes, Madam Speaker, when one refers to a man, a male, a boy, or a man, as being gentle, sometimes that is perceived as being soft or being vulnerable. Carlos Moorhead was neither soft nor vulnerable, but he was, indeed, gentle. He was a gentle man. He loved this House, and he loved the Committee on the Judiciary, and for that matter the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property. I think it is very fitting, I say to those who have handled the bill and I say to my friend the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde], I think it is very fitting that this bill be introduced and enacted and that that Post Office in Glendale, I have never been to Glendale, CA, one day I may ride by there and look with pride as it, is identified as the Carlos J. Moorhead Building.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I want to respond to the unfounded and increasingly bizarre criticism of H.R. 400, the 21st Century Patent System Improvement Act. Throughout the winter and spring of the current session, I have been involved with the writing, reshaping, and marshaling support for H.R. 400. While I understand that the legislative process is necessarily deliberate and often contentious, I confess my ongoing amazement that this bill has engendered so much controversy. Madam Speaker, we are not talking about a red meat issue that divides people on partisan ideological lines. This is not a subject matter that hits at the gut or tears at the heart. This is not gun control, abortion, or the death penalty. This is a patent bill, but significant to America's economic well-being. Now, for most people the words ``patent bill'' are sufficient to induce sleep. For a small minority, however, it inspires a level of paranoia that reaches biblical proportions. I recently witnessed two floor critiques of H.R. 400 and S. 507 and the experience was quite revealing, Madam Speaker. Previously, I was led to believe that my exclusive motivation in sponsoring H.R. 400 was to destroy the U.S. patent system. But no, I am far more ambitious. I have now learned that Senator Hatch and I are part of a nefarious plot designed to ruin the United States of America financially. Madam Speaker, the two orations through which I sat were, charitably considered, devoid of factual content. Worst still, however, were the base metaphors and cliches invoked to drive home the opposition's point. There were references to secret deals with the Japanese Government that will enable Japanese corporations, Chinese corporations, huge multinationalists, and if it can be believed, the People's Liberation Army, to bully the little guy and brutalize Americans. Representatives from American corporations were criticized for having talked to Congressmen and were clearly identified as members of the enemy. Presently, the paranoid jumble was tied together and we learned that H.R. 400 and S. 507 constitute the first fight in a war that, if not won on our opponents' terms, will result in the complete internationalization of American economic activity and the total elimination of our liberty. I recall no mention of black helicopters or drug trafficking by the Queen of England, but such testimony is sure to follow. Madam Speaker, for anyone who cares to know the facts, H.R. 400 and S. 507 are forward-thinking attempts to make our current patent system even stronger. Both bills would allow the Patent and Trademark Office to operate more like a business on a day-to-day basis, while subjecting the agency to congressional and executive oversight. Good faith users of the patent system, those who the Constitution was intended to protect, will be guaranteed a minimum of 17 years of patent term and, in most instances, will receive more than 18 years. Far from hurting applicants, the publication feature of H.R. 400, or what is left of it, will inhibit patent submarining, which does indeed harm American businesses and generally violates the constitutional spirit of patent policy. Both bills also create a new patent pending right, along with a commercial use defense for inventors who do not have the resources to file for protection. And companies which pedal application scams to innocent inventors will be punished severely under H.R. 400. A well-known American inventor once wrote, ``with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance to keep pace with the times.'' This inventor, Madam Speaker, was Thomas Jefferson and he knew a little bit about the Constitution, which charges the Congress with the duty of promoting the progress of science and useful arts through intellectual property. None of us discharges his or her duty by pandering to the worst instincts of other people. Nor do we honor ourselves by pretending that complex and arcane subject matter is easily and snappily explained. The regrettable effect of the two lectures just described is that they may motivate 20 or 30 people in some Member's district to write or call urging a ``no'' vote on the patent bill. I urge support of the patent bill.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the Collections of Information Antipiracy Act, a bill to encourage continued investment in the production and distribution of valuable new collections of information. Electronic collections, and other collections of factual material, are absolutely indispensable to the American economy on the verge of the new century. These information products put a wealth of data at the fingertips of business people, professionals, scientists, scholars, and consumers, and enable them to retrieve from this haystack of information the specific factual needle that they need to solve a particular economic, research, or educational problem. Whether they focus on financial, scientific, legal, medical, bibliographic, news, or other information, collections of information are essential tools for improving productivity, advancing education and training, and creating a more informed citizenry. They are also the linchpins of a dynamic commercial information industry in the United States. Developing, compiling, distributing, and maintaining commercially significant collections requires substantial investments of time, personnel, and money. Information companies must dedicate massive resources when gathering and verifying factual material, presenting it in a user-friendly way, and keeping it current for and useful to customers. U.S. firms have been the world leaders in this field. They have brought to market a wide range of valuable collections of information that meet the information needs of businesses, professionals, researchers, and consumers worldwide. But several recent legal and technological developments threaten to cast a pall over this progress, by eroding the incentives for the continued investment needed to maintain and build upon the U.S. lead in world markets for electronic information resources. I recently received a report from Dr. Laura D'Andrea Tyson, former National Economic Advisor to the President and former Chair of the White House Council on Economic Advisors. Dr. Tyson's study demonstrates strong economic reasons for providing adequate statutory protection for the data base industry, and points out that failure to act may result in adverse effects on technological progress, on economic growth, and possibly on the research, education, and scientific communities. Noted authors and scholars have also endorsed the need to provide some protection to collections of information, to prevent freeloaders from appropriating the fruits of others' investments. Here in the United States, the 1991 Supreme Court decision in Feist Publications versus Rural Telephone Service Co. marked a tougher attitude toward claims of copyright in data bases. While reaffirming that most--although not all--commercially significant collections of information satisfy the ``originality'' requirement for protection under copyright, the Court emphasized that this protection is ``necessarily thin.'' Several subsequent lower court decisions have underscored that copyright cannot stop a competitor from lifting massive amounts of factual material from a copyrighted collection to use as the basis for its own competing product. Producers are concerned that some of these cases may also cast doubt on the ability of a proprietor to use contractual provisions to protect itself against unfair competition from such free riders. In cyberspace, technological developments represent a threat as well as an opportunity for collections of information, just as for other kinds of works. Copying factual material from another's proprietary collection, and rearranging it to form a competing information product--just the kind of behavior that copyright protection may not effectively prevent--is cheaper and easier than ever through digital technology that is now in widespread use. When all these factors are added together, the bottom line is clear: it is time to consider new federal legislation to protect developers who place their materials in interstate commerce against piracy and unfair competition, and thus encourage continued investment in the production and distribution of valuable commercial collections of information. While copyright, on the Federal level, and State contract law underlying licensing agreements remain essential for protecting the enormous investment in collections of information, there are gaps in the protection that can best be filled by a new Federal statute which will complement copyright law. The Collections of Information Antipiracy Act would prohibit the misappropriation of valuable commercial collections of information by unscrupulous competitors who grab data collected by others, repackage it, and market a product that threatens competitive injury to the original collection. This new Federal protection is modeled in part on the Lanham Act, which already makes similar kinds of unfair competition a civil wrong under Federal law. Importantly, this bill maintains existing protections for collections of information afforded by copyright and contract rights. It is intended to supplement these legal rights, not replace them. The Collections of Information Antipiracy Act is a balanced proposal. It is aimed at actual or threatened competitive injury from misappropriation of collections of information or their contents, not at uses which do not affect marketability or competitiveness. The goal is to stimulate the creation of even more collections, and to encourage even more competition among them. The bill avoids conferring any monopoly on facts, or taking any other steps that might be inconsistent with these goals. This bill differs dramatically from H.R. 3531, introduced in the last Congress by then-Chairman Carlos Moorhead. H.R. 3531 proposed to enact a new form of sui generous copyright protection of data bases. This bill is a minimalist approach grounded in unfair competition principles as a complement to copyright, and the damage that can be done from substantial copying of collections of information. In drafting this bill, I was particularly mindful of the concerns of the library, scientific research, and educational communities. Concerns raised in response to the introduction of H.R. 3531 last year by these groups warned of the dramatic consequences that could result from legislation in this area. My staff and I heard these concerns, through personal meetings and through the Copyright Office report on this issue presented to the Congress earlier this year. This bill alleviates those concerns by specifically allowing access and use for those purposes, while still providing necessary protection to ensure continued investment and production of collections of information. This legislation provides the starting point for legislative activity on an important and complex subject. I look forward to hearing the suggestions and reactions of interested parties and of my colleagues at a hearing later this month.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of S. 996, a bill introduced to reauthorize the existing Federal court arbitration programs established in Chapter 44 of Title 28 of the U.S. Code. On June 23 of this year we passed by voice vote the House version of this bill, H.R. 1581. The bill reauthorizes 20 pilot arbitration programs which have been in existence in the U.S. district courts around the country for 20 years. These programs have been unquestionably successful over the years in resolving Federal litigation in a fair and expeditious manner and improving the efficiency of those Federal courts which participate in the program. Upon consideration of this bill by the Senate an amendment was adopted to reauthorize another very successful reform from the Civil Justice Reform Act, the requirement that a list of each Federal judge's 6-month-old motions and 3-year-old cases be published and disseminated twice each year. According to one report, this reporting requirement has led to a 25-percent reduction in the number of cases pending more than 3 years in the Federal system. The version of S. 996 being considered today contains two additional provisions. The first is an amendment to reauthorize for 5 more years certain temporary judgeships which are due to expire this year. Statistics compiled from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts indicate that the case loads in these districts require the continued use of temporary judgeships to prevent case backlogs. The amendment contains provisions similar to those introduced by the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Hyde] chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, and Senator Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The other provision would transfer a Federal judgeship from the Eastern District of Louisiana to the Middle District of Louisiana. The amendment seeks to alleviate the burdensome caseload facing the Middle District there, which is four times the national average. The change is similar to the legislation Senator John Breaux has pending in the other body. The current authorization of the arbitration programs expires on September 30 of this year, and thus there is some urgency, Mr. Speaker, in reauthorizing these very successful programs prior to that date. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bipartisan bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for her generous comments. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the Senate bill under consideration.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 996) to provide for the authorization of appropriations in each fiscal year for arbitration in United States district courts, as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding this time to me. How far down this road we have advanced. Now a balanced budget is within our grasp. The White House, Republicans, Democrats are all taking credit for it, and that is fine. But these tax reductions, Mr. Speaker, would not be before us were it not for a Republican Congress, and if there are those who do not believe this, see me after work and I will sell you a used bridge. Capital gains tax reduction, educational tax benefits, estate tax exemption threshold increased. I could recall just a few recent years ago when some of our Democrat friends were daring to lower the threshold of the estate taxes from $600,000 down to $200,000. That sent a shock wave throughout America, throughout rural America particularly, and now family farms and residents and estates will now be exempt from that heavy hand of the death tax. It has been a long time coming, but it is here. These matters, Mr. Speaker, constitute the Republican agenda. Everyone knows that unless they have been residing in a cave. The President has embraced our agenda and, some say, is receiving more credit for it than are the Republicans. That is OK. It has been said, ``Anything can be accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit for it.'' This is a day, Mr. Speaker, when empowerment is being returned to hard-working Americans, and that is where it belongs. I commend everybody who had a hand in it, Democrats, Republicans alike, but most particularly I say to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer], chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, Well done.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the dedication, public service, and patriotism of Col. William D. Cummings, U.S. Air Force, on the occasion of his retirement after a career of faithful service to our Nation. Col. Bill Cummings' strong commitment to excellence will leave a lasting impact on the vitality of our modern warfighters, commanding admiration and respect from his military and civilian colleagues as well as Members of Congress. Colonel Cummings of Summerfield, NC, is a graduate of East Carolina University. He is serving his last assignment in the Air Force as Deputy for Program Integration and Congressional Activities, Deputy Chief of Staff, Air and Space Operations, in the Pentagon. After earning his pilot's wings at Vance Air Force Base, OK in 1968, Colonel Cummings worked as a C-130 pilot at Sewart Air Force Base in Tennessee. As an AC-130A gunship aircraft commander in Thailand, Colonel Cummings accumulated 118 combat missions during the Vietnam War with the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing. After returning to the United States he was assigned as a tactical airlift director, and in June 1982 he was selected to command the 375th Transportation Squadron. Just 4 years after he was named senior airlift controller, Colonel Cummings became vice commander for the 322d Airlift Division at Ramstein AB, Germany in 1991. As commander of the 621st Air Mobility Support Group, he directed strategic airlifts in 12 countries through Europe and Saudi Arabia. Upon his return to the United States he assumed his current responsibility of Deputy for Program Integration and Congressional Activities for Deputy Chief of Staff, Air and Space Operations. The colonel is a command pilot with over 3,000 flying hours. His military decorations include the Legion of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross with one oak leaf cluster, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters, the Air Medal with seven oak leaf clusters, and the Air Force Commendation Medal. He has also received the Outstanding Unit Award with ``V'' for valor and five oak leaf clusters, the Organizational Excellence Award, the Combat Readiness Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with two service stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with palm. Our Nation, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Air Force, and his family can truly be proud of the colonel's many accomplishments. He is a man of extraordinary talent and integrity. While his honorable service will be genuinely missed in the Department of Defense, it gives me great pleasure to recognize Col. William D. Cummings. On behalf of the citizens of the Sixth District of North Carolina, we wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the No Electronic Theft Act, also known as the NET Act. I commend the bill's author and my good friend, Representative Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, for his leadership on this important copyright issue. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, I cannot overemphasize the importance of this legislation; in fact, I plan to schedule a hearing on the NET Act and the broader subject of copyright piracy later in the fall. Industry groups estimate that counterfeiting and piracy of intellectual property--especially computer software, compact discs, and movies--cost the affected copyright holders roughly $20 billion last year. Regrettably, the problem has great potential to worsen. The advent of digital video discs, similar to conventional compact discs but capable of storing far more material while rendering perfect secondhand copies, will only create additional incentive for copyright thieves to steal protected works. The legislation introduced by Representative Goodlatte will deter copyright piracy by further criminalizing the act in a firm but fair manner. The NET Act constitutes a legislative response to the so-called LaMacchia case, a 1994 decision authored by a Massachusetts Federal court. In LaMacchia, the defendant encouraged lawful purchasers of copyrighted software and computer games to upload these works via a special password to an electronic bulletin board on the Internet. The defendant then transferred the works to another electronic address and encouraged others with access to a second password to download the materials for personal use without authorization by or compensation to the copyright owners. While critical of the defendant's behavior, the court precluded his prosecution under a Federal wiretap statute, stating that this area of law was never intended to cover copyright infringement. The court's dicta indicated that Congress has tread cautiously and deliberately in amending the Copyright Act, especially when devising criminal penalties for infringement. It is self-evident, Mr. Speaker, that this transgression--the unauthorized access to a company's products--has even greater potential to ruin small, start-up companies. Let us not forget that small businesses still comprise that sector of our national economy which provides the most employment opportunities for American citizens. Thousands of independent hackers motivated like LaMacchia will cause harm to our Nation's workers and the small businesses which employ them. LaMacchia's behavior was not trivial; it deserves to be criminalized. Accordingly, the NET Act would proscribe the willful act of copyright infringement, either for ``commercial advantage or private financial gain''; or by reproducing or distributing one or more copies of copyrighted works which have a retail value of $5,000 or more. In direct response to LaMacchia, the legislation specifically encompasses acts of reproduction or distribution that occur via transmission, or computer theft. In addition, ``financial gain'' is defined as receiving ``anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works.'' This change would enable the Department of Justice to pursue a LaMacchia-like defendant who steals copyrighted works but gives them away--instead of selling them--to others. The legislation includes maximum statutory penalties of up to $250,000 in fines and prison terms of 6 years. Mr. Speaker, the public must come to understand that intellectual property rights, while abstract and arcane, are no less deserving of protection than personal or real property rights. The intellectual property community will continue its work in educating the public about these concerns, but we in the Congress must do our job as well by ensuring that piracy of copyrighted works will be treated with an appropriate level of fair but serious disapproval. Again, I congratulate Representative Goodlatte for his leadership in this regard, and I look forward to working with him and other interested colleagues as we consider the NET Act in the near future.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, it has recently been reported that a former Presidential candidate still has a campaign debt that was incurred in the 1980's, years ago. At the conclusion of my first campaign for a seat in the Congress, I was saddled with a campaign debt. I promptly borrowed money and paid those to whom my campaign was indebted. To have done less, Madam Speaker, would have been inexcusable and without defense. Responsible people simply do not casually ignore debts. Campaign reform is consistently discussed on Capitol Hill. Perhaps the time has come to direct attention to the propriety of paying off campaign debts rather than ignoring them. Frequently we ask incredulously why the American people do not trust Members of Congress. Longstanding campaign debts that remain unpaid and ignored is one glaring reason.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. Here we are, Mr. Chairman, on our perennial trip to the whipping post. Who is to be whipped? Tobacco, of course, men and women who work 14 to 16 hours a day to get their crop to the barn and then to the market to make lives better for their children, workers who are employed at Lorillard in my hometown, nearby Phillip Morris, Reynolds, and Leggett, formerly, until American was forced to close their doors. And finally, the companies are to be whipped because they pay a million dollars of taxes to local and State governments, to enable these governments to extend services to thousands of citizens. Tobacco, Mr. Chairman, has traditionally been known as the golden weed in my part of the country. One would think to hear this rhetoric in this hall that the weed was scarlet, the color of sin. Protect the golden weed. That is all we are asking. This is unconscionable what is being done here today, Mr. Chairman. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment of my friend from New York and see it go down in flames.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill under consideration.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 1661, the Trademark Law Treaty Implementation Act. The Trademark Law Treaty Implementation Act, popularly known as TLT, sets a ceiling on certain filing and renewal requirements which its member nations may not exceed. Here in the United States, it removes some of the procedural hurdles to processing trademark applications and renewals thereby streamlining the process for the users. Additionally, the bill we are considering today contains a minor housekeeping amendment which seeks to harmonize the remedy provisions passed last year as part of the trademark dilution statute, with the other remedy provisions of the Latham Act. There is no opposition to the bill as amended, and it is supported by the International Trademark Association and the American Intellectual Property Law Association. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bipartisan bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1661) to implement the provisions of the Trademark Law Treaty, as amended.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from American Samoa [Mr. Faleomavaega], and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to honor two firefighters from the Sixth District of North Carolina, Eddie Moser and Kent James of Burlington, NC. While enjoying time off from work at a nearby lake, they rescued four people from a boat that had capsized and brought them to shore. Three survived, but unfortunately, they were unable to save the fourth victim. Just minutes earlier, the four were getting into the boat at a pier while the two firefighters were waiting to remove their own boat and load it onto a trailer. The four motored out into the lake, when excessive weight in the forward portion of the boat caused water to seep in. Panicking, the four boaters started screaming as the boat began to sink. Moser and James heard the cries for help and jumped into their own boat and quickly motored out. By the time the firefighters got to them, the boat was overturned and only one of the passengers was swimming. Moser and James put two of the struggling passengers safely into a third boat operated by a passerby and swam the remaining passengers to shore. The firefighters gave CPR to one of them, a 44- year-old Gibsonville man who had been caught under the boat and could not swim. Unfortunately, the efforts were too late and Earl M. Smith, Jr., passed away. During the first 10 to 12 minutes of the rescue, the firefighters had no lifesaving equipment other than their own manpower. It was in those minutes that their water safety and lifesaving skills as firefighters saved the lives of Melvin Murray, Nellie Murray, and Jill Marley. Jill Marley, the only passenger who could swim, says that Moser and James not only saved her life, but the lives of her boyfriend and her boyfriend's mother. The firefighters utilized their training in CPR, EMT, and water rescue to make this heroic rescue. Burlington Fire Chief Frank Andrews has honored both men with a distinguished Life Saver Award. He said he would ask the Burlington City Council to give the two an accommodation honoring their actions. However, the two firefighters said they are humbled by all the attention. They felt they were just trying to help those in need and were not seeking any recognition. They said they did what any other trained person would have done. Burlington Fire Operation Chief Tommy Belton feels that they did something out of the ordinary and he is very proud of them. Moser has been with the Burlington Fire Department for 9 years and James has been with the department for 6 years. These brave men should be recognized and commended for their outstanding act of public service. On behalf of the citizens of the Sixth District of North Carolina, it is my honor to recognize those who risked their own lives to save others. We are all grateful for their selfless act.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, the On-Line Copyright Liability Limitation Act is being introduced in response to concerns raised by a number of on-line service and Internet access providers regarding their potential liability for copyright infringement when infringing material is transmitted on-line through their services. While several judicially created doctrines currently address the question of when liability is appropriate, providers have sought greater certainty through legislation as to how these doctrines will apply in the digital environment. Undoubtedly, service providers will be concerned that the exemption contained in this bill does not go far enough and copyright owners will be concerned that it goes too far. This bill is meant to be a new starting point for discussion among the groups affected by its provisions. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia invested months of his time in the last Congress leading negotiation sessions between on-line service and Internet access providers, telephone companies, libraries, universities, and copyright owners. He will continue to steer the negotiation process in this Congress as the parties involved begin discussions starting from the framework established in the On-Line Copyright Liability Limitation Act. general approach The general approach of the bill is to be as simple and streamlined as possible. It provides a single exemption, written broadly so as to cover a range of acts dealt with in separate exemptions in drafts under discussion last year. The availability of the exemption depends on the actor's level of control, participation, and knowledge of the infringement, rather than on the particular type of technology used or the particular type of business being conducted. Similarly, the exemption is available to any person engaging in the covered activity, not limited to those falling within a defined category of ``service provider.'' A decision was made not to attempt to codify industry-specific codes of conduct or detailed notification procedures at this time. The bill does not foreclose these possibilities, however, should the parties who will be affected directly by the provisions of this bill concur that they are desirable. It also provides certain legal protections for parties who act responsibly to assist in preventing infringement. Section by Section Analysis

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, the Piedmont Triad of North Carolina has a rich sports heritage and a man who has reported on much of it for more than half a century has been honored as one of the best ever produced by our State. I am referring to sports broadcasting legend Charlie Harville of Greensboro, NC. Harville, the first television sports anchor in the Greensboro-High Point market, has been inducted into the North Carolina Sports Hall of Fame. As a student at High Point College, now University, Charlie Harville began his broadcasting career at WMFR-AM as a substitute baseball announcer for the Class D North Carolina State League Thomasville Tommies. After he worked his first game on April 28, 1938, the radio station hired him permanently. Harville's budding broadcasting career was suspended by 4\1/2\ year tour of duty in the Army Air Corps during World War II. Following his discharge, he landed radio jobs in Martinsville, VA, Goldsboro, NC, and LaSalle, IL, before he returned to Greensboro for a job at WFMY Radio. In 1949, WMFY-TV went on the air and Charlie Harville became the station's first sports anchor. Harville remained at WFMY until 1963 when WGHP, channel 8 in High Point, hired him away. He was replaced at WFMY-TV by Woody Durham, better known these days as the voice of the University of North Carolina Tar Heels. Charlie left WGHP in 1975, and after 2 years of free-lance sports announcing, he was rehired by WFMY in 1977 to replace the departing Woody Durham. Charlie retired from full-time reporting and channel 2 in 1988. In 42 years of broadcasting, WFMY had known only two sports directors, both legends in North Carolina, Charlie Harville and Woody Durham. Now 78, Charlie Harville, shows no signs of slowing down. We are sure that his 9 children and 22 grandchildren will make sure of that. He continues to tape a 4-minute daily interview show for Greensboro Bats baseball games on WKEW-AM. He attends most Bats games at War Memorial Stadium, and he remains an active member of Society of American Baseball Research. His close friend and president of the Greensboro Sports Commission Tom Ward told the Greensboro News & Record that Charlie Harville is a ``walking encyclopedia with a photographic mind who can recite batting averages from 1944.'' Retired News & Record sports editor Irwin Smallwood said that Charlie Harville ``was an authentic pioneer in regional television. He set a standard to which others still aspire.'' His colleagues share that opinion and that is why he was elected to our State's Sports Hall of Fame. We can think of no better place for Charlie to be except maybe at a baseball game, on the golf course, or at the race track. We always knew that Charlie Harville was an All Star, but we were particularly pleased to learn that now he is a Hall of Famer, too. On behalf of the citizens of the Sixth District of North Carolina, we salute Charlie Harville on his induction into the North Carolina Sports Hall of Fame. To borrow Charlie's signature closing line--``That's the best in sports today.''

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor two distinguished gentlemen from the Sixth District of North Carolina. Mr. Marion Kirby and Mr. Mac Morris of Greensboro, NC, have dedicated themselves to educating America's youth and to striving for excellence in high school athletics. Coach Morris was head coach of the Page High School Pirates' basketball teams for 25 years and Coach Kirby was head coach of the Pirates' football teams for 23 years. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to announce that on September 17, 1997, the football stadium and the gymnasium at Walter Hines Page High School will be named and dedicated after Marion Kirby and Mac Morris, respectively. Coach Morris won three State basketball championships over 3 decades with Page High School, but more important than these victories is Mr. Morris' genuine concern for his students and players. Mac could always be counted on to push his athletes to work just a little bit harder, and to urge his students to set their goals just a little bit higher. Through his rigorous work ethic, Coach Morris earned the respect of his students, both on the court and in the classroom. Coach Kirby won four State football championships for the Pirates, and has always set an example for his players and students. Marion always seemed to be a miracle worker. He took teams which seemed to have mediocre talent and somehow turned them into contenders for a State championship. Coach Kirby has always led by example, taught from experience, and listened to the students with genuine concern. Both of these men are role models in the teaching and coaching communities. These gentlemen have earned the respect of every student who has entered their classrooms, and every athlete who has set foot upon the basketball court or the football field. They have always conducted themselves with the highest integrity and they insisted that their teams played within the rules. This honor is truly befitting of these two gentlemen. Their dedication to America's youth and their perserverance in striving for excellence are examples to us all. We are certainly proud of Mr. Kirby and Mr. Morris. We thank them for their dedication, and we wish them the best of luck in the future.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1581.