« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
third act provided penalty for printing false claim of copyright and prohibited the importation of articles bearing a false claim of copyright. In 1904 provision was made for protection to exhibitors of foreign literary, artistic or musical works at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition. A bill of 1905 permitted ad interim copyright for one year of books published abroad if registered here within thirty days after pub
lication and bearing notice of reservation. Private A curious incident in American copyright legislacopyright
tion has been the passage of private copyright acts, nine in all, of which the earliest in 1828, as amended in 1830 and 1843, continued the copyright of John Rowlett"in a useful book, called Rowlett's Tables of discount and interest" from its original publication in 1802 till 1858, – curiously the present period of fiftysix years. In 1849 the copyright of Levi H. Corson in a perpetual calendar or almanac was renewed by special act. In 1854 an appropriation of $10,000 was made to Thomas H. Sumner for his new method of ascertaining a ship's position and the copyright was extinguished. In 1859 a special act gave to “Mistress Henry R. Schoolcraft” and her heirs for fourteen years the right to republish her husband's work on the Indian tribes originally published by order of Congress and to make any abridgement thereof, and a similar special copyright was voted in 1866 for Herndon's “Exploration of the Amazon” for his widow. An act of 1874 authorized the validation of William Tod Helmuth's work on surgery which had been imperfectly entered for copyright two years before, and a ninth private act in 1898 validated for like reason
the copyright of Judson Jones in a work on orthoepy. American In 1900 the act for the government of the territory possessions of Hawaii repealed the Hawaiian copyright act of
1888 and extended United States copyright to Hawaii.
In the same year the act providing temporary government for Porto Rico extended the copyright laws to that island. In 1904 the Attorney General rendered an opinion that Philippine authors were entitled to United States copyright but that the book must be manufactured within the United States. Hawaii, Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands, as well as Alaska, were later included by name in the jurisdiction of the code of 1909. American copyright was extended to the Canal Zone by War Department order in 1907.
Finally, in 1909, there was passed the new copy- The Ameriright code repealing all previous legislation and pro- can code of
1909 viding comprehensively for the whole subject of copyright, literary, artistic, dramatic, musical,
or other. Under this code copyright is effected by publication with the statutory notice of copyright and completed by registration of two deposit copies sent to the Copyright Office promptly after publication. The manufacturing clause is continued and extended to require printing and binding as well as typesetting within the United States. The musical author is given control over mechanical reproductions though under provision for compulsory license in case he permits any such reproduction. The copyright term is for twenty-eight years with a like renewal term, making fifty-six years. Rights of performance are included under copyright, and unpublished works are specifically protected by special registration. These are the salient features of the code which is stated and discussed in detail in succeeding chapters.
In line with the dramatic act of 1897, the dramatic State authors between 1895 and 1905 procured state legis- protection of
playright lation in the States of New Hampshire, New York, Louisiana, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Minnesota, California, Wisconsin,
Connecticut and Michigan, differing somewhat in form, to give effect to the federal copyright laws in respect to dramatic performance or to apply the principles of common law through the punishment of
dramatic companies disregarding performing rights. Citations Citations of all these laws will be found in Appen
dix A of the report of copyright legislation from the Register of Copyrights, included in the report of the Librarian of Congress for 1904; and the full text of the United States acts, except the later ones, are given in “Copyright Enactments 1783–1904" issued from the Copyright Office in 1905 as Bulletin No. 3, and in
a second revised and enlarged edition, extending to Trade-Mark 1906, reissued in 1906. The Trade-Mark act of Feb
ruary 20, 1905, supplemented by an act of May 4, 1906, covers the protection of labels, etc., excluded from copyright by the copyright act, and is given, with a list of trade-mark laws of foreign nations, and trade-mark treaties with them, rules, indexes, etc., in a Government publication, entitled “United States Statutes concerning the registry of trade-marks
with the rules of the Patent Office relating thereto." Common The act of 1790 received an interpretation, in 1834, law rela- in the case of Wheaton v. Peters (rival law reports), tions
at the bar of the U. S. Supreme Court, which placed copyright in the United States exactly in the status it held in England after the decision of the House of Lords in 1774. The court referred directly to that decision as the ruling precedent, and declared that by the statute of 1790 Congress did not affirm an existing right, but created a right. It stated also that there was no common law of the United States and that (English) common law as to copyright had not been adopted in Pennsylvania, where the case arose. So late as 1880, in Putnam v. Pollard, claim was made that this ruling decision did not apply in New York,
which, in its statute of 1786, expressly “provided, that nothing in this act shall extend to, affect, prejudice, or confirm the rights which any person may have to the printing or publishing of any books or pamphlets at common law, in cases not mentioned in this act." But the N. Y. Supreme Court decided that the precedent of Wheaton v. Peters nevertheless held. During the discussion of the present copyright code, Edward Everett Hale consulted with other veteran authors whose early works were passing out of copyright, with the intention of bringing a test case for the extension of copyright under common law after the expiration of the statutory period. But on proposing such a case to legal counsel he became assured that such a suit could not be maintained.
As in the English case of Donaldson v. Becket, Divided the decision in the American ruling case of Wheaton opinions 0. Peters came from a divided court. The opinion was handed down by Justice McLean, three other judges agreeing, Justices Thompson and Baldwin dissenting, a seventh judge being absent. The opinions of the dissenting judges, given in Eaton S. Drone's "A treatise on the law of property in intellectual productions,” constitute one of the strongest statements ever made of natural rights in literary property, in opposition to the ruling that the right is solely the creature of the statute. “An author's right,” says Justice Thompson, “ought to be esteemed an inviolable right established in sound reason and abstract morality.” There seems, indeed, to be a sense of natural copyright among the American Indians; an Ojibwa brave will not sing the song belonging to another tribe or singer, and a Chippewa youth may learn his father's songs, on a customary gift of tobacco, but does not inherit the right to sing them.
SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT: RIGHTS AND EXTENT
THE scope of copyright, or the nature and extent of the right or privilege, may be said to cover at common law identical rights with those in any other property, to use the phrase which, in Siam, transfers these rights to statutory law, but in statutory law must be taken to depend upon the terms of the statute.
The new American copyright code, passed March 4, 1909, and in force July 1, 1909, in its fundamental provision broadly sets forth and specifically defines the scope of copyright, by providing (sec. I): “That any person entitled thereto, upon complying with the provisions of this Act, shall have the exclusive right:
“(a) To print, reprint, publish, copy, and vend the copyrighted work;
“(b) To translate the copyrighted work into other languages or dialects, or make any other version thereof, if it be a literary work; to dramatize it if it be a non-dramatic work; to convert it into a novel or other non-dramatic work if it be a drama; to arrange or adapt it if it be a musical work; to complete, execute, and finish it if it be a model or design for a work
“(c) To deliver or authorize the delivery of the copyrighted work in public for profit if it be a lecture, sermon, address, or similar production;
“(d) To perform or represent the copyrighted work publicly if it be a drama, or, if it be a dramatic work and not reproduced in copies for sale, to vend any manuscript or any record whatsoever thereof; to make or to procure the making of any transcription