under previous laws of the United States shall terminate upon the expiration of such renewal term.

After the 28 years which a copyright runs they are entitled to an extension of 28 years, so that a period of 28 years

The CHAIRMAN. About how many books, periodicals, and publications entitled to be copyrighted are copyrighted every year? Mr. SOLBERG. The last year's entries were 172,000.

The CHAIRMAN. About 175,000 in round numbers?

Mr. SOLBERG. Yes, sir; they are increasing gradually every year. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, after 28 years only 5 per cent of those who have copyrights have availed themselves of the privilege of recopyrights?

Mr. SOLBERG. Yes, sir; on the average.

The CHAIRMAN. And then after that period the balance of the copyrights fall into the public domain?

Mr. SOLBERG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you account for that?

Mr. SOLBERG. By this fact: Simply that the life of a book does not depend upon the copyright for its existence. There are a thousand other considerations. When a book is dead it is dead and buried; it does not make any difference what you gentlemen fix, in framing your bill, as to the term of its copyright existence. It does not mean that all these millions of copyrights amount for so much in anybody's affairs; it is only the few distinguished books that live beyond the term of renewal. Of late years the number of renewals has increased, not so much because there has been a greater demand for the books of which the copyright has been renewed, but there has been a movement afoot to incite authors to make application for such renewal and extension of copyright.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a very interesting suggestion, Mr. Solberg. I would like to know if you can give me for the benefit of the record and the extension of your remarks as to the renewals numbering only 5 per cent of the subsisting copyrights, what percentage of them are novels, what percentage of them works of drama, what percentage of them are periodicals, and what percentage of them are philosophical, and so forth? It would be interesting for this committee to know-where they have a right to renewal and extension for 28 years and where only 5 per cent of the actually subsisting copyrights was renewed with the other percentage falling into the public domain.

Mr. SOLBERG. As I explained

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; he explains the matter because an author, for instance, of dramatics, periodicals, cyclopaedic, or other composite work that has been written has not sufficient interest; if not living, his widow, his children, or his estate may do it; I should think after that length of time some one of his estate would want to do something about it, or if not, it may become insolvent and fall into the public domain.

Mr. SOLBERG. It seems the publisher is not interested or the author is not interested. If the author is not living, his widow may do it, or his children may do it, or his estate may do it.

The CHAIRMAN. You have just heard Mr. Solberg say his widow or his children or his estate may do it. There are two reasons why the 95 per cent do not avail themselves of the privilege of recopy

right. It may be either because nobody buys the book, or he or his estate are not interested. What difference does it make to Congress whether he or some one else does it as a matter of protection?

Mr. DIES. The representation could be made by somebody else? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; and I think by way of reasoning, that in the event the authors or the estates do not avail themselves of this privilege of copyright renewal or extension, they should not have this protection. Suppose, Congressman Dies, you had written a book 25 years ago called Uncle Tom's Cabin-as we heard the story the other day, this copyright had been dead 25 years, and along comes a new authorization and this whole thing had been reproduced and the play given over the radio-think what it might mean to your children had you taken advantage of your right to have the copyright renewed; you could subpoena the infringer, or your family could get a court injunction to stop him, for then you would be entitled to the protection of the court to the value of your plays or your scientific books. As to the author, for all I may know, that book may have been written by another human being instead of writing it himself. Mr. DIES. Suppose you had written this play and did nothing for 25 years, and after it was refused and then produced, who would benefit?

The CHAIRMAN. I would, or my estate.

Mr. DIES. Suppose then your estate, the people were not able to locate you, they did not know exactly where you were, and say, 25 years after that play you had written was going to be taken over by some one else and some new interest might spring up and they were not able to locate your heirs, what then?

The CHAIRMAN. We can provide for that in the bill, that should there be some more persons of that estate who can not be found, the benefit then goes into the public domain.

Mr. DIES. There is an opportunity there where it could not be used at all?

The CHAIRMAN. No; there isn't; you can use it, we can put that in

escrow.

Mr. DIES. Just the same as where the man dies and you do not know of an estate?

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, the heirs come right along. Go right ahead, Mr. Solberg.

Mr. SOLBERG (reading):

If, therefore, it is now similarly proposed to permit the extension of the copyright to equal the new term of 56 years only when renewal applications are actually recorded during the last year of the original term of copyright, such increase of protection would extend to less than 200,000 works instead of to nearly 4,000,000 works.

Of course that is an estimate.

The CHAIRMAN. The renewals may be increased, but it would be a small proportion of the great mass.

Mr. DIES. Now, you have been in favor of the automatic copyright?

Mr. SOLBERG. Absolutely.

Mr. DIES. And you have been in favor of entering into the convention of Berne?

Mr. SOLBERG. Absolutely.

The CHAIRMAN. It gives the author a right to his copyright during his lifetime and for 50 years after his death. Are you in favor of that?

Mr. SOLBERG. I suppose there is not much to be lost in the value of the copyright after that length of time, 50 years.

The CHAIRMAN. That is almost perpetual copyright.

Mr. SOLBERG. It might be; but if it has not existed that long it would not be.

The CHAIRMAN. William Cullen Bryant wrote Thanatopsis and it lived 50 years, and if he had had that copyright renewed or extended, it may have lived a great deal longer, 100 years.

Mr. DIES. I do not think that is possible.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, we will not do it like that.

Mr. Sousa said his copyright should be perpetual. He goes all over the world and arrives at a destination with his property and gets a nice sum for it. Why should we give him perpetual copyright? Why doesn't he do with his copyright what everyone else does with his copyright-protect it by taking advantage of the privilege of renewal or extension. We can not give him a monopoly, we do not propose to do that, and the public should be considered. We are giving him the privilege of his right to renew, and on the basis of your own contention you only show that 5 per cent avail themselves of the privilege of copyright renewal or extension after 28 years.

Mr. SOLBERG. That may be. What I call 95 per cent is discarded, thrown into the wastepaper basket; they do not even avail themselves of the privilege of renewal.

Mr. RICH. And 100 years; we do not know what trouble is liable to come up 100 years from now.

Mr. DIES. Then, Mr. Chairman, I should think you would be entitled to give the people a bill which automatically extended this copyright 56 years in every case.

The CHAIRMAN. We will. I want you to understand if I succeed in submitting the evidence before this committee, and since Congress gives the period of copyright, with the privilege of renewal or extension, we will give them an automatic copyright for 56 years. Let them avail themselves if they want to, and it will protect the author's estate if he has enough foresight to take advantage of the renewal privilege and protect him and his descendants. Go ahead, Mr. Solberg.

Mr. SOLBERG (reading):

It should be stated that making such extension of the term of protection contingent upon the requirement of renewal registration would not affect our entry into the Copyright Union although such entry is contingent upon not making copyright protection depend upon compliance with any formalities. The nationals of the countries of the Copyright Union would secure the proposed new period of copyright protection form the creation of their works to continue until the end of 56 years from the date of first publication or first public performance of such works-from the time, in other words, when they became available for the benefit of the public.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, if this committee should, in its wisdom, see fit after consideration to write a bill giving copyright protection 56 years from the creation of the work, and we complied with other considerations, this would not deter us from going into

the convention of Berne, nor would it deter us if we still required the application for renewal. You see that is behind the union, in the event we go in, gentlemen.

Mr. RICH. That is anterior to the thing.

Mr. DIES. What do you mean by "copyright"?

The CHAIRMAN. I will explain it to you and the feature of it to be put in the bill that will once and for all put a stop to this thing. Suppose you write a book-a drama-Mr. Swank, at that moment you acquire that work-and the work is acquired that is the product of your mind. Is that right? That is a copyright of yours right away, the moment it is created and acquired, that is a copyright that belong to you. Is that clear?

Mr. SWANK. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. All right; suppose you take this book from the time it is copyrighted, its creation, you can put it in the trunk and forget about it, it is your product, it is your copyright.

Mr. SWANK. Do you have to put anything on it?

The CHAIRMAN. You do not have to put anything on it. You and your wife have a child; that child, if you do not name it, is your copyright; it come into the world; the moment that child of yours has come into the world, no matter what you name it, it is a copyright of your child, the moment you say, "I want to protect that child, give it a name so that the whole world may know it "; and you send it over to Washington to the Copyright Department to be entered in the book called "Registration and Recordation." Is that clear? Mr. SWANK. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose your child is born into the world to be called so-and-so from Oklahoma, Mr. Swank, if anyone should innocently infringe on your right that you do not know about, you have a right to go into court and obtain an injunction restraining him from infringing. Suppose your term of court in Oklahoma required your attention and you had not registered and recorded in Washington, and a man from Richmond applies and his name is recorded in your place, and he goes over to Mr. Dies, and when Mr. Dies produces the very same thing you gave him, according to the common law you have a right to go into court and enjoin him.

Mr. SWANK. But I can not enjoin him?

The CHAIRMAN. You can, of course, and obtain an injunction to prevent him by proving it in court; but if you register and record that child of yours in Washington at the Copyright Office, you can go into court and collect all the damages you want because you served notice to the world that your child has had a name given to it. There are three specifications that go toward the protection of your child in Oklahoma. If it is born to you, it is copyrighted; if you want the world to know it is yours, you record it in the Copyright Office; once you have registered and recorded it, then you can have unlimited damages the story is laid. Suppose some of it differed after you have had it recorded; there are two remedies if it is conclusive; you go to the court and obtain an injunction restraining this man from infringing on your property, or sue for damages. Mr. SWANK. But you won't collect damages?

The CHAIRMAN. You would, if it is yours, but you have to show that; that is the difference which we would like to put into our new

113839-32-22

bill: Where you register and record you have copyright and a right to a statutory fee of $50 or $500 or $5,000. Do you see my viewpoint? Mr. SWANK. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it clear now? Now, that feature which gives you the right from the time it is born is called automatic; from the time you register and record it, it is no longer automatic.

Mr. RICH. It seems to me a man has a right to write something if he wishes and place it in a way if it is published so that it can be registered and recorded, and that should be the time our new law should start from, because I should be in favor of protecting the author from infringement if his copyright is registered.

The CHAIRMAN. That is exactly my purpose, and if you do not register or record it, it is unnecessary that you resort to an injunction for infringement, and if it is a deliberate steal before you have a chance to record or register it, you have a right to a statutory appeal. Have I explained it properly to you? Do you understand my point, Congressman Dies?

Mr. SOLBERG. I would like to have Mr. Rich understand that that has all been tested out in the United States and before Congress here in Washington. Prior to the law now in force an author could write a title for his work, file it and thus register his claim. It went on and the difficulties that piled up were such that when it came to the revision of the law, everybody said it must be done away with, and it was. I have known cases, 20 or 30, not quite 30, 22, 24, and even 26 years, between the time of filing the title and depositing the book. Lots of people have ideas for books they might write. Why should they give them to the world? So they registered in advance the title.

The CHAIRMAN. We give them that right. In this new law that the commitee is going to write, we give them the right. We say that is your right, common-law right.

Mr. DIES. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, anyone ought to encourage the laws of registration and recordation.

The CHAIRMAN. Exactly. But, my dear Congressman Dies, you must not think that this committee, in order to protect the authors, the novelists, the writers here, that we must protect those in Europe, so we have to do something here that will give us an opportunity to get the common law in here as it is in Europe.

Mr. SOLBERG. Copyright started in the English language in England. Every book written was copyrighted, and a law was passed to require registration.

The CHAIRMAN. From the beginning?

Mr. SOLBERG. From the beginning.

The CHAIRMAN. There is your answer.

Mr. SOLBERG. No; that is not your answer. They have since abolished registration in Europe.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you tell this committee, Mr. Solberg, why they abolished registration in Europe? What reason can you give us for their having abolished it? Give us a reason that will appeal

to this committee.

Mr. SOLBERG. I can only give my personal experience. When I first began to go to the copyright conferences abroad there was a very lively debate on the subject and the suggestion was made to establish universal copyright registration. It was argued for years and it had