of the mimeograph; that the copies produced in this way are issued for general circulation; and it is in these sheets of answers bound as stated that the publishers desire to register a claim for copyright: and you ask my opinion as to whether or not the Register of Copyrights has authority, under the copyright act of March 4, 1909 (35 Stat., 1075), to register the same.

The real question is, whether or not, under the copyright law, a book must be printed before a claim for copyright therein can be admitted to registration. If copies of this work were not reproduced for sale, it is conceded that the claim should be registered under section II of the act; but, inasmuch as numerous copies are struck off for circulation, it is thought, and correctly so I think, that if copyrighted at all, it must be as a publication and not as a mere manuscript.

By section 5 of said act it is provided:

That the application for registration shall specify to which of the following classes the work in which copyright is claimed belongs: (a) Books, including composite and cyclopædic works, directories, gazetteers, and other compilations.

A collection of sheets of paper or similar material, blank, written or printed, bound together; commonly, many folded and bound sheets containing continuous printing or writing.

The courts have shown the greatest liberality in interpreting the copyright laws, and have, in favor of authors, extended the word “book” so as to make it include works which do not fall even within this broad definition. In Clayton v. Stone & Hall (2 Paine, 382, 391) the court held that a newspaper could not be copyrighted on account of its method of publication, but in the course of its opinion the court said:

It seems to be well settled in England that a literary production, to be entitled to the protection of the statute on copyrights, need not be a book in the common and ordinary acceptation of the word—a volume, written or printed, made up of several sheets and bound up together. It may be printed on one sheet, as the words of a song or the music accompanying it. It is true that the English statute of 8 Anne, in the preamble, speaks of books and other writings; but the body of the act speaks only of books, the same as in the act of Congress; and a learned commentator upon American law (2 Kent's Com., 311) seems to think the English decisions on this subject have been given upon the body of the statute of Anne, without laying any stress upon the words other writings in the preamble. See also Drone on Copyrights, 142; 9 Cyc., 898.

Clearly, therefore, the work submitted is a book as defined both by lexicographers and the courts, and the claim for copyright therein may be registered unless there is some provision in the act which prohibits it.

By section 9 it is provided:

That any person entitled thereto by this act may secure copyright for his work by publication thereof with the notice of copyright required by this act;

and by section 12 it is provided:

That after copyright has been secured by publication of the work with the notice of copyright as provided in section nine of this act, there shall be promptly deposited in the Copyright Office, or in the mail addressed to the Register of Copyrights, Washington, District of Columbia, two complete copies of the best edition thereof then published, which copies, if the work be a book or periodical, shall have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing provisions specified in section fifteen of this act.

The copyright therefore is obtained by publication of the book and the giving of notice of copyright required by the act; but it is suggested that in consequence of the reference in section 12 to the manufacturing provisions in section 15, and the requirements of said section 15, the copyright can not be enforced, and may be subsequently entirely defeated, and the Register of Copyrights can not issue a certificate of registration in consequence of a failure to deposit in the Copyright Office two copies printed as required by said section.

Section 15, among other things, provides:

* * *

That of the printed book or periodical specified in section five, subsections (a) and (b) of this act the text of all copies accorded protection under this act shall be printed

*

*

*

from type set within the limits of the United States, etc. The use of the word "printed" in connection with "book" might very well be construed as a recognition that other kinds of books are subject to copyright, but that the provision of this section, in so far as it applies to books, is restricted to printed books.

But, in addition to this, the purpose of section 15 should be taken into consideration in determining whether or not it has the effect of limiting the right of copyright to printed books; and the language of that section, as well as the report of the committee which had the bill in charge, clearly shows that it was inserted solely for the purpose of protecting American labor and that it was not the design of Congress to thereby in any respect restrict the character of works which, under other sections of the act, might be copyrighted. In drafting the bill it was no doubt assumed that books would, ordinarily and probably universally, be printed for circulation, and the purpose was to require all the printing of books protected under the act to be done as described in said section 15, but it was certainly not intended to prescribe any regulation as to the form in which the book should appear. That is, in the passage of sections 15 and 16 Congress was concerned in where and by whom the work of preparing the books for circulation and sale should be done, and not in the particular method by which the author should impart his ideas to the public. A contrary holding might lead to great uncertainty and confusion. It has been universally held that there is no requirement as to the number of pages on which a work shall appear in order that it may be entitled to the benefit of copyright. If it appear on one or even four pages, then there can be no necessity for a binding; and yet section 15 provides that "the printing of the text and the binding of the said book shall be performed

within the limits of the United States," thus implying, if the strict construction suggested be adopted, that the book must not only be printed, but must also be bound before the claim for copyright in the same can be registered. Of course Congress did not intend to, and did not, introduce such a radical innovation into the copyright law. The meaning of that clause in section 12 which provides that the book "shall have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing provisions of section 15 of this act" is that the book shall not have been produced in violation of that section; and section 15 means that if the book is printed, the printing shall be done as required therein.

I am of the opinion, therefore, that the claim to copyright in the work in question should be registered.

["Official Opinions of the Attorneys-General of the United States," vol. 28, pp. 265-269.]

Jan. 25, 1910

(T. D. 30301)

ABANDONMENT OF COPYRIGHT

Copyright notice of abandonment of copyright on Oxford Cyclopædic Concordance by the Oxford University Press, American Branch.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT
January 25, 1910

SIR: The department is in receipt of a letter from the Oxford University Press, American branch, of New York City, giving notice that they have abandoned the copyright on Oxford Cyclopædic Concordance copyrighted by them in 1903.

Upon arrival in the United States of any copies of the said work with the notice of copyright obliterated, or a notice of the abandonment of the copyright plainly printed upon the same page with the notice of copyright and adjacent thereto, such books may be admitted to entry as books not copyrighted in the United States.

Respectfully
(72875.)

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York

JAMES F. CURTIS
Assistant Secretary

["Treasury Decisions," vol. 19, No. 5, February 3, 1910. go. Washington, Govern

ment Printing Office, 1910, pp. 3-4.]

IMPORTATION OF TRANSLATION OF AMERICAN COPYRIGHTED BOOKS

TREASURY DEPARTMENT

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

Washington, June 23, 1910

SIR: The department duly received your report of the 25th ultimo June 23, 1910 on the protest of Sylvanus Stall, of the Vir Publishing Company, against your decision denying entry of certain books imported per steamship Euxinia, March 28, 1910, and also your letter of the 4th instant, transmiting a copy of said book.

The protestant states that in order to be prohibited by section 15 these books must be accorded protection under the copyright act of March 4, 1909; that these books are Swedish copies, the translation of which was duly authorized by the proprietor of the copyright in the United States; and that the Swedish translation is not copyrighted in the United States.

As it appears that the books in question were translated and manufactured in Sweden by a citizen of Sweden, they are, in the opinion of the department, of foreign origin in a language other than English, and are specifically exempted from the manufacturing provision of section 15 of the copyright act, and as such books bear no notice of copyright in the United States and are not piratical copies, they are not prohibited importation. You are therefore hereby authorized to release the books in question.

The book, inclosed with your letter of the 4th instant, is herewith returned.

Respectfully

C. P. MONTGOMERY
Chief, Division of Customs

The COLLECTOR of Customs, Philadelphia, Pa.

["The Publishers' Weekly," vol 78, No. 3. New York, July 16, 1910, p. 407.]