there was an omission of the notice Cited without definite application, Evidence. Though compliance with the statutory requirement must be pleaded and proved as a prerequisite, complainant is not required to furnish separate, distinct, and specific proof as to each copy which he may have published. Falk v. Gast Lithographing & Engraving Co. (C. C. 1889) 40 Fed. 168. Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing § 9540. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 19.) Place of application of notice of copyright; one notice in each volume or number of newspaper or periodical. The notice of copyright shall be applied, in the case of a book or other printed publication, upon its title-page or the page immediately following, or if a periodical either upon the title-page or upon the first page of text of each separate number or under the title heading, or if a musical work either upon its title-page or the first page of music: Provided, That one notice of copyright in each volume or in each number of a newspaper or periodical published shall suffice. (35 Stat. 1079.) See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Title-page. Each book must have a title, that is, some word or set of words by which it shall be known, and must contain one particular page devoted in full or in part especially to the title, and this page should be one that is readily found without examining every page of the work. Freeman v. The Trade Register (C. C. 1909) 173 Fed. 419. Inserting or inscribing notice.-A celluloid sheet containing photographic reproductions of the launching of a vessel is sufficiently marked by the attaching of a plate at one end bearing the notice of copyright. Edison v. Lubin (1903) 122 Fed. 240, 58 C. C. A. 604, reversing decree (C. C. 1903) 119 Fed. 993, and appeal dismissed Lubin v. Edison (1904) 25 Sup. Ct. 790, 195 U. S. 625, 49 L. Ed. 349. A map to be used in connection with, and placed in a pocket inside of, a book which contained a proper copyright notice, such notice was sufficient to cover the map also, though the notice on it was insufficient. Lydiard-Peterson Co. v. Woodman (1913) 204 Fed. 921, 123 C. C. A. 243, rehearing denied (1913) 205 Fed. 900, 126 C. C. A. 434. The copyright notice may be inserted in a second edition of the same work published in a different number of volumes, without impairing the copyright. Dwight v. Appleton (C. C. 1843) Fed. Cas. No. 4,215. In the case of a work published in several volumes at different dates, the copyright notice need only be inserted in the first volume. Id. The publication of notice is an indispensable condition in procuring a copyright. Baker v. Taylor (C. C. 1848) Fed. Cas. No. 782; Jollie v. Jaques This section as formerly enacted pre- This section as formerly enacted does not require such notice to be inscribed upon the original painting or statuary copyrighted, but only on the "several copies" of the same; and a copyright of a painting is not invalidated by the fact that such notice is not inscribed on the original painting. Werckmeister v. American Lithographic Co. (C. C. 1905) 142 Fed. 827. Under this section as formerly enacted, the copyrighting of a number of a periodical as a whole, with notice of such copyright given on the title page or the page following, covers and protects all the articles printed therein. Harper & Bros. v. M. A. Donohue & Co. (C. C. 1905) 144 Fed. 491. Where copyrighted material originally published in pamphlets is thereafter combined in a bound volume, such volume should disclose the date of the copyright on each pamphlet to set in operation the period of exclusive enjoyment. West Pub. Co. v. Edward Thompson Co. (C. C. 1909) 169 Fed. 833, decree modified (1910) 176 Fed. 833, 100 C. C. A. 303. In a copyrighted legal publication consisting of digest paragraphs, while no one paragraph, when reprinted in a different volume, would in itself be considered a different "edition" of the en tire original volume, yet, if any appreciable portion is republished indicating the use of the material of the earlier publication in a later work the later work must carry a notice of the earlier copyright. Id. There can be but one copyright for the same book for the first term of 28 years, and notice of only a single entry for copyright is necessary therein. The notice of copyright in a subsequent edition must be either of the date of the original or of the date of the subsequent entry, depending upon whether or not such changes or additions have been made as to constitute the later edition a new book. Id. A preliminary page in a periodical containing in display type the name of the publication and also the volume, number, and date of the issue, and a copy of which was deposited as the title to obtain copyright protection, must be considered the "title page" within the meaning of this section. Freeman v. The Trade Register (C. C. 1909) 173 Fed. 419. Where a copyrighted weekly publication is consolidated into a quarterly and later into an annual publication, the copyright on the weekly numbers could be protected only by repeating the original notice whenever the copyrighted matter was afterwards published, under this section as formerly enacted. ord & Guide Co. v. Bromley (C. C. 1910) 175 Fed. 156. Rec A copyrighted publication which consists of a map, and also a directory with the name of the publisher printed on the map, and also the words "Copyright 1908," contains a sufficient notice to protect the copyright of the map. Woodman v. Lydiard-Peterson Co. (C. C. 1912) 192 Fed. 67. Abandonment.-A copyright of a book is vitiated by its subsequent publication, with the author's consent, in a magazine with no other notice of copyright than that of the entry of the magazine in the name of its publishers. Mifflin v. R. H. White Co. (1903) 23 Sup. Ct. 769, 190 U. S. 260, 47 L. Ed. 1040, affirming decree (1902) 112 Fed. 1004, 50 C. C. A. 661, 61 L. R. A. 134; Same v. Dutton (1903) 23 Sup. Ct. 771, 772, 190 U. S. 265, 47 L. Ed. 1043, affirming decree (1902) 112 Fed. 1004, 50 C. C. A. 661, 61 L. R. A. 134. An American copyright is not lost by publishing a work abroad and selling it for use there without inserting the notice of copyright. United Dictionary Co. v. G. & C. Merriam Co. (1908) 28 Sup. Ct. 290, 208 U. S. 260, 52 L. Ed. 478, affirming judgment G. & C. Merriam Co. v. United Dictionary Co. (1906) 146 Fed. 354, 76 C. C. A. 470. Cited without definite application, Pierce & Bushnell Mfg. Co. v. Werckmeister (1896) 72 Fed. 54, 56, 18 C. C. A. 431. § 9541. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 20.) Effect of accidental omission of notice of copyright from particular copy or copies of work. Where the copyright proprietor has sought to comply with the provisions of this Act with respect to notice, the omission by accident or mistake of the prescribed notice from a particular copy or copies shall not invalidate the copyright or prevent recovery for infringement against any person who, after actual notice of the copyright, begins an undertaking to infringe it, but shall prevent the recovery of damages against an innocent infringer who has been misled. by the omission of the notice; and in a suit for infringement no permanent injunction shall be had unless the copyright proprietor shall reimburse to the innocent infringer his reasonable outlay innocently incurred if the court, in its discretion, shall so direct. (35 Stat. 1080.) See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Notes of Decisions Omission of notice.-The owner of a copyrighted literary production does not lose the exclusive property therein given by the copyright because a licensee inadvertently omits to publish the copyright notice. American Press Ass'n v. Daily Story Pub. Co. (1902) 120 Fed. 766, 57 C. C. A. 70, 66 L. R. A. 444, appeal dismissed (1904) 24 Sup. Ct. 852, 193 U. S. 675, 48 L. Ed. 842. Under this section omission by accident or mistake of notice of copyright held not to prevent recovery of profits, but to prevent allowance of statutory damages in lieu of damages and profits. Strauss v. Penn Printing & Publishing Co. (D. C. 1915) 220 Fed. 977. Where, in place of the copyright notice permitted by section 9539, ante, there was a blurred and indistinct mark, held, that there was an omission of the notice within this section as to damages. Id. Under this section, defect in copyright notice does not invalidate the copyright, but prevents owner recovering damages against one innocently infringing it. Alfred Decker Cohn Co. v. Etchison Hat Co. (D. C. 1915) 225 Fed. 135. Publication without notice as abandonmont to public.-See notes under §§ 9517 and 9530, ante. § 9542. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 21.) Ad interim protection of book published abroad. In the case of a book published abroad in the English language before publication in this country, the deposit in the copyright office, not later than thirty days after its publication abroad, of one complete copy of the foreign edition, with a request for the reservation of the copyright and a statement of the name and nationality of the author and of the copyright proprietor and of the date of publication of the said book, shall secure to the author or proprietor an ad interim copyright, which shall have all the force and effect given to copyright by this Act, and shall endure until the expiration of thirty days after such deposit in the copyright office. (35 Stat. 1080.) See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Notes of Decisions Persons entitled to copyright.-The interim copyright act of January 7, 1904, passed for the protection of exhibitors of foreign literature at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, did not apply to a foreign publisher of a book previously published in English, and sold by American publishers in the United States. Encyclopædia Britannica Co. v. Werner Co. (C. C. 1905) 135 Fed. 841, decree affirmed Same v. American Newspaper Ass'n (1906) 142 Fed. 966, 74 C. C. A. 228. Deposit of copies of work.-Application for registration of copyright should be denied: (1) Where the ad interim deposit under this section is a complete book, and the permanent de posit under section 9543, post, is only a part of such book; (2) where both the ad interim and permanent deposits are fragments of the work; (3) where the copy, printed and bound in accordance with the manufacturing provisions of section 9536, ante, of the act and deposited in the first instance, is only a fragment of the work; and (4) where a complete book is deposited, but the affidavit correctly indicates that only a part of the work is printed in the United States. (1910) 28 Op. Atty. Gen. 176. The word "book," as used in this section, and in class (a) of section 5 (section 9521, ante), and elsewhere in that act, means the entire book, and not a fragment thereof. Id. Extension of ad interim § 9543. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 22.) protection to full term of copyright. Whenever within the period of such ad interim protection an authorized edition of such book shall be published within the United States, in accordance with the manufacturing provisions specified in section fifteen of this Act, and whenever the provisions of this Act. as to deposit of copies, registration, filing of affidavit, and the printing of the copyright notice shall have been duly complied with, the copyright shall be extended to endure in such book for the full term elsewhere provided in this Act. (35 Stat. 1080.) See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Section 15 of this act, mentioned in this section, is set forth ante, § 9536. § 9544. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 23.) Duration of copyright; renewal by proprietor; renewal by author or his widow, widower, or children, etc. The copyright secured by this Act shall endure for twenty-eight years from the date of first publication, whether the copyrighted work bears the author's true name or is published anonymously or under an assumed name: Provided, That in the case of any posthumous work or of any periodical, cyclopedic, or other composite work upon which the copyright was originally secured by the proprietor thereof, or of any work copyrighted by a corporate body (otherwise than as assignee or licensee of the individual author) or by an employer for whom such work is made for hire, the proprietor of such copyright shall be entitled to a renewal and extension of the copyright in such work for the further term of twenty-eight years when application for such renewal and extension shall have been made to the copyright office and duly registered therein within one year prior to the expiration of the original term of copyright: And provided fur ther, That in the case of any other copyrighted work, including a con- See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Term and extension.-The validity of The right to use a copyrighted name on the expiration of the copyright becomes public property, but must not be used to deceive the public. Atlas Mfg. Co. v. Street & Smith (1913) 204 Fed. 398, 122 C. C. A. 568, 47 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1002, appeal dismissed Street & Smith v. Atlas Mfg. Co. (1913) 34 Sup. Ct. 73, 231 U. S. 348, 58 L. Ed. 262. A person employed to compile a book for a certain sum, and credited as author on the title page, the employer taking a conveyance of the copyright, has the sole interest in the additional term allowed to authors. Pierpont v. Fowle (C. C. 1846) Fed. Cas. No. 11.152. Upon expiration of a copyright on a dictionary obtained in 1847, both the work and the generic name "Webster" became public property. Ogilvie v. G. & C. Merriam Co. (C. C. 1907) 149 Fed. 858, decree modified G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Ogilvie (1908) 159 Fed. 638, 88 C. C. A. 596, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 549, 14 Ann. Cas. 796, writ of certiorari denied (1908) 28 Sup. Ct. 761, 209 U. S. 551, 52 L. Ed. 922. Under the statute, a renewal of copyright can be made only in the name of the author, "or his widow or children if he be dead," and not in the name of the assignee of the person entitled to such renewal. West Pub. Co. v. Edward Thompson Co. (C. C. 1909) 169 Fed. 833, decree modified (1910) 176 Fed. 833, 100 C. C. A. 303. The renewal or extension of copyrights under this section can be secured only by the person or persons specifically designated in the statute, and cannot, therefore, be granted to the assignee of the copyright. (1910) 28 Op. Atty. Gen. 162. The privileges of copyright are purely statutory, and the right to a renewal or extension of a copyright must be found within the statute. Id. See, also, notes under § 9524, ante. Cited without definite application, Caliga v. Inter-Ocean Newspaper Co. (1909) 30 Sup. Ct. 38, 39, 215 U. S. 182, 54 L. Ed. 150; White-Smith Music Pub. Co. v. Goff (1911) 187 Fed. 247, 109 C. C. A. 187; Donnelley v. Ivers (C. C. 1882) 18 Fed. 592, 593; WhiteSmith Music Pub. Co. v. Goff (C. C. 1910) 180 Fed. 256, affirmed (1911) 187 Fed. 247, 109 C. C. A. 187. § 9545. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 24.) Renewal of copyrights subsisting at time act goes into effect. The copyright subsisting in any work at the time when this Act goes into effect may, at the expiration of the term provided for under existing law, be renewed and extended by the author of such work if still living, or the widow, widower, or children of the author, if the author be not living, or if such author, widow, widower, or children be not living, then by the author's executors, or in the absence of a will, his next of kin, for a further period such that the entire term shall be equal to that secured by this Act, including the renewal period: Provided, however, That if the work be a composite work upon which copyright was originally secured by the proprietor thereof, then such proprietor shall be entitled to the privilege of renewal and extension granted under this section: Provided, That application for such renewal and extension shall be made to the copyright office and duly registered therein within one year prior to the expiration of the existing term. (35 Stat. 1080.) See notes to section 1 of this act, ante, § 9517. Term and statute an original copyright might be secured by such proprietor. WhiteSmith Music Pub. Co. v. Goff (1911) 187 Fed. 247, 109 C. C. A. 187, affirm extension.-This section limits such right of renewal to the persons named therein and does not extend it to the "proprietor" of the work, although both under that and the prior ing decree (C. C. 1910) 180 Fed. 256. § 9546. (Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, § 25, as amended, Act Aug. 24, 1912, c. 356.) Infringement. If any person shall infringe the copyright in any work protected under the copyright laws of the United States such person shall be liable: (a) Injunction restraining. (a) To an injunction restraining such infringement; (b) Damages and profits; amount; other remedies. (b) To pay to the copyright proprietor such damages as the copyright proprietor may have suffered due to the infringement, as well as all the profits which the infringer shall have made from such infringement, and in proving profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove sales only and the defendant shall be required to prove every element of cost which he claims, or in lieu of actual damages and profits such damages as to the court shall appear to be just, and in assessing such damages the court may, in its discretion, allow the amounts as hereinafter stated, but in case of a newspaper reproduction of a copyrighted photograph such damages shall not exceed the sum of two hundred dollars nor be less than the sum of fifty dollars, and in the case of the infringement of an undramatized or nondramatic work by means of motion pictures, where the infringer shall show that he was not aware that he was infringing, and that such infringement could not have been reasonably foreseen, such damages shall not exceed the sum of one hundred dollars; and in the case of an infringement of a copyrighted dramatic or dramatico-musical work by a maker of motion pictures and his agencies for distribution thereof to exhibitors, where such infringer shows that he was not aware that he was infringing a copyrighted work, and that such infringements could not reasonably have been foreseen, the entire sum of such damages recoverable by the copyright proprietor from such infringing maker and his agencies for the distribution to exhibitors of such infringing motion picture shall not exceed the sum of five thousand dollars nor be less than two hundred and fifty dollars, and such damages shall in no other case exceed the sum of five thousand dollars nor be less than the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, and shall not be regarded as a penalty. But the foregoing exceptions shall not deprive the copyright proprietor of any other remedy given him under this law, nor shall the limitation as to the amount of recovery apply to infringements occurring after the actual notice to a defendant, either by service of process in a suit or other written notice served upon him. First. In the case of a painting, statue, or sculpture, ten dollars for every infringing copy made or sold by or found in the possession of the infringer or his agents or employees; Second. In the case of any work enumerated in section five of this Act, except a painting, statue, or sculpture, one dollar for every infringing copy made or sold by or found in the possession of the infringer or his agents or employees; Third. In the case of a lecture, sermon, or address, fifty dollars for every infringing delivery; |