Lapas attēli

Mr. BLOOM. Mention some one else in any line of business that has not the same right with the creator of songs and the playwright and author that you are trying to take away from him. Everyone else has the right for individual bargaining.

Mr. SMITH. I would not want to make analogy, because you can not find another condition where the person who has a right of individual bargaining operates under the same conditions as the man in the music business.

Mr. BLOOM. Why should not the publisher who publishes the works of an author be treated the same- -as soon as he does publish it, every other publisher could publish that book under the same terms?

Mr. SMITH. Let me get that question again.

Mr. BLOOM. Why should not any publisher, after a single publisher publishes the works of an author, as soon as that work is published-why should not every publisher in the country have the same right to publish that book?

Mr. SMITH. I can see right away one reason, because if one publisher publishes a book, anybody can get that book and have access to the things in that book. That is not true of mechanical licensing.

The CHAIRMAN. I will say to those who are here and desire to be heard in opposition to this bill, the radio people and Mr. Brylawski and other interests, any who desire to be heard in opposition to this bill, that they will be given an opportunity to be fully heard; and if it is agreeable to the members of the committee, we will not have a session to-morrow, Saturday. We would all like to have a little breathing spell, and we will continue the hearings at the call of the chairman. Immediately after finishing the joint hearings with the Senate committee on the Dill-Vestal bill, the hearing will be called and you will be all notified. It is understood the committee wants to hear Mr. Solberg, but we can get his statement after the case has been made on both sides. Mr. Buck says he would like to have a couple of minutes to make a statement at this time.


Mr. Buck. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, you have before you to-day the most comprehensive copyright bill that has ever been put before Congress-all the eggs are in one basket. We sat in here day after day and night after night for two years, and previous to that two years I daresay, Mr. Solberg put the services of a lifetime in an endeavor to protect the authors' rights in this country. If we are going to have a bill, certainly, with these things continually cropping up, we are never going to get any place on this bill, proponents or opponents.

I subscribe to the theory that these gentlemen opposed to this bill should have all the time they care to have, but I respectfully suggest to you gentlemen who have been so patient and so decent in fulfilling your duties as officers of this Government, who have sat on this thing day and night, this is the document that Mr. Solberg has been years on, and I say to you, get together, crystallize your opinions, pull up the loose threads, and when we are back in this room on this document again, let us do the best we possibly

can to draw everybody together in connection with this bill. I subscribe to the opinion that those who oppose the bill are entitled to all the time they can get, but at the same time let us confine ourselves to the bill that everything has been concentrated on. You have brought down here to-day men from all over the country, from the university; you brought here yesterday prominent publishers from all over the country; last year, artists and painters from all over the country; attorneys from all over the country, and they have all been concentrating on this one particular piece of legislation that is under revision, the entire copyright act, known as the Vestal bill.

Now, for the sake of everybody here, and I speak for the proponents as well as opponents, and members of the committee, there is a time when human endurance and human patience ends. If we could have it understood, at least, within lines of fairness and equity, that we do concentrate on this one thing, that is what should be done. We will never get any place if we are going to have just a continual short circuiting. Any one can come down here with a bill and induce one of 435 members of Congress to see the justice of his cause and inject it into this hearing. I submit in fairness to Congress and everybody connected with it that we should concentrate on some one thing here.

The CHAIRMAN. Hearings will be held on this bill.

Mr. BLOOM. What do you think of this idea, to allow the gentlemen that want to be heard, to file briefs and put them into the record, and we will read the record and save the trouble of these people coming down.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that would not be quite the right thing to do. I think these folks ought to have the right to appear in person.

Mr. BUCK. I subscribe to that.

The CHAIRMAN. On Monday a week, we can have a meeting and get the opposition through and go to work on this bill.

Mr. Buck. I respectfully call your attention to this one clause at the moment, that is the chief cause of contention. It is unfair, and there is not much justice in compelling every magazine writer, every book writer, every book publisher, and all the other allied interests, to be so treated owing to one clause in this bill. That is all I say, in fairness.

(Thereupon, at 4.30 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned to meet again on Monday, April 26, 1926, at 10 o'clock a. m.)

Thursday, April 29, 1926.

The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m., Hon. Albert H. Vestal presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. A representative of The Marmeins, professional dancers and teachers of dancing in New York, is here this morning, and has asked that a short statement in behalf of his concern be included in the record, which, if there is no objection, may go in at this point.


THE MARMEINS, New York City, April 24, 1926.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIRS: We will greatly appreciate it if you will have this letter read before the committee now meeting for the purpose of revising the present copyright laws.

At present there is no provision made for the protection of original choreographic, dance, or ballet material, unless that material is published and printed.

We wish to ascertain if there is not some way of protecting written dances when they are recorded in typewritten form only. For this reason, viz, that many performers and teachers of dancing, create original dance ideas (not steps only, but characters, ideas, and situations) and wish to keep this material exclusive for their own professional use, but there is no protection whatsoever for this material and no redress when others use it without the author's permission.

We are asking that the copyright law include protection for written dance material in manuscript form. We will greatly appreciate it if you will give this matter your consideration, and will inform us what can be done to arrange for this protection of choreographic, dance, and ballet creations. Thanking you and awaiting your reply, we are,

Very truly yours,

Professional dancers and teachers of dancing.

Mr. Raney wants to be heard again this morning in answer to some further statements on the bill, and we will hear him now.


Mr. RANEY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, since the last hearing there has come into my possession a 4-page circular addressed to the Committees on Patents of the House and of the Senate and signed by the chairman of the bureau of copyright of the National Association of Book Publishers. It essays to make clear the difference in the purpose and the purport of the Perkins and the Vestal bills. A third of a page is given to the property in the extended term and three pages to importation of copyright works, so that in the writer's opinion the latter constitutes the outstanding difference between the two bills. The statement opens as follows:

In both bills the earlier section specifies that the author is to secure for himself and his assign, the publisher, the "exclusive control" of the property created under the copyright.

In the Perkins bill (H. R. 5841), however, later provisions, entirely inconsistent with the principles of copyright, and with the provisions of all other copyright statutes, take away this exclusive control and undermine to a material extent the property values of the copyright.

I desire to insert this whole article in the record.
The CHAIRMAN. It may go in.

[ocr errors]


New York, April 2, 1926.

PENDING COPYRIGHT BILLS-VESTAL BILL H. R. 10434; PERKINS BILL H. R. 5841 Statement for the members of the Committees on Patents of the House and of the Senate:

The Patent Committees of Congress have now before them for consideration two bills which have for their purpose the amendment, or it would be more correct to say the reshaping, of the copyright statute. It may be a convenience to the members of these committees to have before them a statement making clear the difference in the purpose and the purport of these measures.

First. In both bills the earlier section specifies that the author is to secure for himself and for his assign the publisher, the "exclusive control" of the property created under the copyright.

In the Perkins bill (H. R. 5841), however, later provisions, entirely inconsistent with the principles of copyright, and with the provisions of all other copyright statutes, take away this exclusive control and undermine to a material extent the property values of the copyright.

Second. In both bills the terms of copyright is made to cover the life of the author and 50 years thereafter. This constitutes a considerable extension of the term of copyright in the existing statute, and this extension, as furthering the property value of the production, is in itself desirable.

In the Perkins bill the entire property which is created under this extended term of copyright is assigned to the author or to the author's representative. (See sec. 13, p. 11.)

Such a provision places it in the power not only of the author himself, but even of some distant heir of a dead author, to block, under penalty of some exacting price, the further publication of the book.


Third. In the case in which a publisher (and such a consideration has particular importance for the publisher of textbooks) has purchased the copyright and, as a result of such purchase, has made a substantial investment in revising the text of the book and in bringing the text down to date, and also in securing introductions and maintaining the book in use in institutions, this provision involves the risk of sacrificing without consideration the property so created. This risk does not obtain in the case of books the copyright of which has not been purchased by the publisher.

Fourth. For books issued under the royalty system it is equitable that the entire protection in the extended term should belong to the author or to the representative of a dead author. The royalty would as a matter of routine be continued through the extended term.

But for books which for the original term have been the property of the publishers and in which, as explained, the publisher is often called upon to incur continued outlay, it is a manifest injustice to have this property appropriated without consideration.

Fifth. In the Vestal bill it is provided that in the cases in which the original copyright is the property of the publisher, the property in the extended term comes under the joint ownership of the publisher controlling the original term and the author or the author's representative. .


Sixth. In each bill it is provided that the importation of books which are the works of American authors, which have been manufactured in the United States and which have been duly entered for copyright, is prohibited.

This is in accord with the "exclusive control" of the copyright that is given under the first section of each bill to the author and to his assign. This provision is in line with the similar provision in the English statute.

Seventh. In the Perkins bill, however, a long series of exceptions are made to this prohibition of importation. The importation of books copyrighted in this country is permitted not only for librarians but for any association, incorporated or unincorporated, also for individuals and the works of foreign authors may be imported for sale as well as for use.

If the Perkins bill should become law, the only person who is prohibited from importing copies of the transatlantic edition of a copyrighted work is the person who is the owner of the copyright, the publisher.

Eighth. Under the similar provision of the Vestal bill (see sec. 30, p. 25, etc.) the prohibition is worded in line with that of the English statute; but for the purpose of meeting the requirements (legitimate in themselves) of collectors who may desire to secure a copy of the transatlantic edition, or of librarians who on one ground or another may prefer the transatlantic edition, it is provided that copies can be imported, not to exceed one copy in one importation, of a transatlantic edition, with the condition that the order for the importation must be made through the owner of the copyright or rather through the publisher who is his assign or representative.

Ninth. This restriction is in line with that which has always obtained for books by American authors duly protected by copyright. The collector or institution has always been able to secure copies of the transatlantic edition of such book, but the importation must be made through the owner of the copyright.

Librarians have convinced the representatives of certain educational institutions that the enactment of a measure leaving with the authors the exclusive control of their property would stand in the way of their importation of works in which the higher institutions are particularly interested-scientific reports, the larger and more expensive scientific publications, etc.

The representatives of these institutions have been misled by incorrect statements. The exclusive control called for under the Vestal bill covers only works which shall be manufactured in this country. The scientific reports and larger reference works, in the importation of which the heads of these institutions are interested, can not be in any way interfered with if the Vestal bill should become law.

Tenth. The Vestal bill proposes, in line with the purpose of the Berne convention, to place all copyrighted books on the same basis. There is no reason why, in a measure intended to secure and to widen international copyright any distinction should be made between books by English authors and books by American authors.

Eleventh. Such a distinction, while contrary to the Berne convention (and the distinction may very probably stand in the way of acceptance by the Berne convention of the United States as a member of the convention) is in direct contravention to the copyright arrangement arrived at with Great Britain in July, 1891. Under this arrangement, the United States placed itself under obligation to give to the English author the same protection in the United States that is given to the American author in Great Britain and that is given to the American author in the home country.

It is the intention of the copyright statute that the author to whom is given the exclusive control of his production should have the right to make sale of publishing rights in different markets. It is only in this way that either the American or the English author is in a position to secure the full return to which he is entitled for the property value of his production.

The Perkins bill prevents the transatlantic author from obtaining more than a partial control of the American market and he can, therefore, not secure his full return.

Twelth. The American publishers are prepared, for the purpose of bringing the United States into the comity of other civilized book-producing countries, to raise no objection to the acceptance by the United States of the regulations of the Berne convention. They realize, however, that the throwing open of the American market to the transatlantic editions of books, the American copyright of which has been secured by transatlantic (usually English) publishers, must subject the American publishers to sharply increased competition. It will leave in the hands of the English publishers the control of many works by English authors which heretofore have come into the hands of American publishers.

Thirteenth. The American publishers take the ground, however, that, in accepting this sharp competition with the undertakings of the English publishers, they must be left in control of the American market for books, whether English or American in origin, the American copyright of which has been secured by themselves.

Fourteenth. This is important not only as a matter of justice to the American publishers and to carry out the purpose of the copyright law, which is stated to be the furthering of the production and distribution of literature, but for the interests of American readers and buyers of books. These interests are best served when the book is printed in an American edition. A book placed in this market in an imported edition can, as a rule, under ordinary business limitations, not be advertised or presented so thoroughly by travelers throughout the country as can be done with a book which has been printed on this side. Fifteenth. It is undesirable also for American business interests to discourage American publishers in making investments in American editions of English books, and particularly in books of the larger compass planned more particularly for the needs of librarians.

Sixteenth. The present policy of the United States is planned to further American manufacturing, and the unrestricted importation provided for in the

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »