workers of America-Herbert went to Burkan and said: "What can we do about this thing?" Then he went around and got me and all the authors and composers whom he could together and we had a meeting to stop piracy and the abuses that statrted to creep up against the men who created songs; and then was formed the America Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers.

We found that not alone in Shanely's was that done, but it took fire and then we found that all the hotels in the country, and picture houses too, were taking our works and using them. I do not blame them if they could get away with it. It necessitated an organization, because an individual author or composer could not possibly protect himself. Every place we went to protect our rights we were confronted and faced with an association; we were confronted and faced with the hotel men's association, the restaurant men's association, and the motion-picture men's association. We did the next best thing, we formed a song writers, authors, and publishers association; and one of its chief functions is to protect the members' rights. That is one of its chief functions, but not the most important function. In the past these gentlemen have whispered in the halls of Congress-like pouring the poison in Hamlet's father's ear-they have gone around the halls of this Congress and told men that we were a monopolistic group of New Yorkers who have got hold of a good thing and are going around trying to strangle people. The American Society has never done anything but be helpful to those very persons to the manufacturers, to the hotel owners, to the motion-picture industry, and to every person who uses our works. It is about high time that some one told you about this propaganda that has been rolling around here.

We are here to-day just as we have been here before; and it is so difficult to say anything new. Many years ago when I first tried to be a writer, in an endeavor to try to get some recognition-and I had a song in the Follies-an old friend of mine, since gone-Richard Harding Davis-I always looked forward to seeing that man; I thought I saw a halo around his head-he was a distinguished figure in American literature. He said: "Buck, you want to be a writer?" I said, "Yes." He said, "You feel it deeply, do you?" I said, "Yes." "Well," he said, "I am going to give you a tip in writing. Whatever you write remember this formula: Always write an old story in a new way, or if you have a new story, a new idea, write it in an old way. You can not tell an old story in an old way-they won't accept that; nor can you tell a new story in a new way—they won't accept that." He said, "Remember that."

I have; and so it is that we appear here to-day to ask you to help us. You have been very patient; you have been very considerate; and I want to reiterate what I said the last time I was here we are going to keep marching down here and knocking on the doors of Congress until we get some recognition. This is the first piece of legislation that the authors and composers have come to Congress and asked help on. Many years we came down here fighting those who wanted to usurp our works. We were in the other position as the opponents of this bill are here to-day. We were trying to hold, safeguard, and protect the things that we own.

I would not be a bit surprised if some of these gentlemen asked you to not do anything with this bill, that there is in contemplation a

general revision of the copyright act, and that they will ask you to wait until the whole act is revised and then give the authors and composers some relief. So far as that is concerned there has been a bill drawn by a very distinguished gentleman and the person who should draw a bill in revision of the copyright act-the register of copyrights himself, Mr. Solberg-and that bill has been before Congress for many years and we have tried in every possible way to see if we could move it to consideration, but a revision of the copyright act is an enormous undertaking. We authors and composers know how long it would take and realize how long it will take for an entire revision of the copyright act; and we have asked that this particular piece of legislation that we suffer under be removed that we may get some relief, because these gentlemen have come up here year after year-and they are coming again to-day I presume to follow the same tactics which has been that of delay under the plea "Let's see if we can't get together."

That has been the plea, and a very smart one; and I don't blame them a bit for looking after their rights. But in following that course the first thing we know Congress has dissolved, and while they say: "Too bad, boys" it just gives them that much more time to reap benefits under this unjust and discriminating provision.

As I said, there is no place in law where you find the counterpart to the compulsory license clause. You can not find it. If a man owns a piece of property and a purchaser comes along he can sit down and bargain and ask what he wants for his property. But, by a peculiar trick of fate in the scheme of things somebody put this amazing and unjust restriction on the author and composer, this highly charged piece of legislation, into the bill without a hearing. We never had a chance to put in an objection to it.

All we ask is that you gentlemen give us the right that you have extended to everybody else. I want to thank you again for you have been so patient in listening to me, because I feel that I have not said anything that has not been said before. While our opponents and ourselves are talking about the same thing, to reiterate a line I have used before: While we are both talking about the spring, it is the spring of the watch in the one case and the spring of the year in the other. That is the distinction and the difference in the views held by our opponents and ourselves; and I sincerely trust that you will give the author and composer that opportunity which for 21 years he has been denied; that you give the manufacturer and everybody else the right to bargain for the product of his creative genius. You have taken it waay from us; you have restricted us; and we have suffered under the restriction. We have tried every possible manner of means to get a hearing and have this thing adjusted. All we want is the simple right to bargain with the products of our brains like everyone else has, unrestricted; and if, as these gentlemen sometimes intimate, we should attempt to put on more than the traffic can bear the public and the courts always take care of the matter; you do not need to adjust that.

I want to thank you for your patience and your consideration; and I will indulge the hope that some day we will get some relief from this piece of legislation; and I say, in retiring, we are coming back again, and we are going to come back as long as men see the right, and feel the right, and think they are capable of coming down and addressing you gentlemen.

I would next like to present to the members of this committee Mr. John Paine, the chairman of the Music Publishers Protective Association.

STATEMENT OF JOHN PAINE, CHAIRMAN OF THE MUSIC PUBLISHERS PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION

Mr. PAINE. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, I have been before this committee on numerous occasions and have always entertained an ambition to make a short speech before the committee, because I think that those of us that believe in the great doctrine of evolution realize that the higher a man goes in the scale of intelligence the shorter is his tail. I do not want you gentlemen to get the idea that I am a low brow. [Laughter.] My experience in the past, however, has been rather unfortunate but I attribute it largely to the interrogatories that have been hurled at me by the former members of the committee-Mr. Bloom and Mr. Reed. Had they not interrupted so constantly I probably would have finished earlier. Therefore, I am hoping that to-day I can make my short speech.

Probably no individual that will appear before your committee is in exactly the same position that I am in. I say that with all frankness, as, years ago I came down opposing Congress enacting any legislation to build up a monopoly to the detriment of an industry. Strange as it may seem, my opposition to such a position on the part of Congress four years ago made me an opponent of the proposed legislation. To-day the same consideration makes me a proponent to the legislation.

In the period of time that has passed since we appeared before this committee opposing a similar bill, a great change has occurred in this industry and I believe that the time has come when we must look at copyright legislation not only from the standpoint of its legal aspects, but from the standpoint of its commercial aspects as well.

The opponents of the bill who came down here conscientiously four years ago believed that if this very legislation that we are asking for to-day were enacted into law it would give to the copyright proprietor a monopoly which would choke off and injure, and proabbly put out of existence, the great industry that they represented. But what have they done in the meantime? Ah! In the meantime they have reached out and they have taken unto themselves these very publishing firms that were proposing the bill before, so that to-day they are not only users of copyright material but owners of copyrighted material. The Victor Talking Machine Co. or the Radio-Victor Co., as it is now known, has its own music publishing firms. Oh, yes, I know that through the strange ledgerdermain of corporate law they do not exactly own these music publishing firms, but the Radio Music Corporation and the Radio Victor Corporation are what shall I say-two atoms of the same molecule.

What does that bring about? That brings about a very strange condition. This great corporation that is down here saying, "We must have access to the copyrights of the United States in order that we may live" own their own copyrights and can and do intend to make use of those copyrights to the maximum. They are in a position to say: "We have what we need and we have no intention

whatsoever of making use of your material, Mr. Independent Publisher, unless we must be virtue of popular demand make use of it." To-day they are in a position to say, "We are going to build up a monopoly, both of a user and of a proprietor, which we intend to make use of as we see fit. We have no regard whatsoever for your copyrights; we have no intention whatsoever to make use of them unless we desire to make use of them."

Gentlemen, the music publisher who is independent and not owned, and not a part of this great system must have some protection against being crushed and destroyed by the very monopoly which they are trying to build up; and so I say that I propose this bill because it is a defense against a monopoly which, if created, will destroy the independent publisher.

Mr. PERKINS. If I may interrupt you right there, Mr. Paine, will not the competitors of the concern which you have just spoken of use their material?

Mr. PAINE. Do the other companies, for instance, use material that the Victor own?

Mr. PERKINS. Yes.

Mr. PAINE. Certainly they can under the present law; but I am not talking about the Victor Co., the Brunswick Co., or the Columbia Co. or other companies. These companies, too, if rumor tells us rightly, will shortly have their own great music publishing firms. Probably the music publishing firms will buy into these great companies rather than the other way around-I do not know-but at all events unless the independent publisher has some protection, then the Brunswick Co. and its group of publishers, and the Victor Co. and its group of publishers and the Columbia Co. and its group of publishers will have such a complete control and monopoly of this entire situation that the independent publisher will be wiped out of the picture entirely. We need this legislation to meet this very deleterious condition that is growing up in this industry.

Mr. PERKINS. Pardon me, Mr. Paine. You speak of the independent publisher. You do not mean the independent mechanical publisher, do you?

Mr. PAINE. There are in this industry groups of owned publishers, publishers that are owned by corporate users-Feist, and Fischer are owned by the Radio Corporation of America. Whitmark, Harms, DeSilver Brown Henderson, Remik, Crawford music companies are owned by Warner Pictures (Inc.). Other companies are owned by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (Inc.). The Famous Music Co. is owned by the Famous Players.

Mr. PERKINS. However, all the copyrights of these various composers can be used by any competitor for 2 cents a reproduction. Is that right?

Mr. PAINE. At the present time that is true,

Mr. PERKINS. That is what I want to get at.

Mr. PAINE. That is an actual fact, clear and definite at the present time that the copyrights of these various publishing groups are open to the whole group. But, let us take the case of Irving Berlin, who is not owned by any of these groups. Victor Co. decides it is going to produce only such copyrights as it owns. It can do that. To be sure, the works of Irving Berlin are available if it wants to use them, but neither the Victor Co. nor any of the other companies is under

requirement to take an Irving Berlin number; and, naturally, owning their own copyrights they intend to make use of the things they own. That is a logical and natural consequence of their ownership.

Mr. BRUNNER. As a matter of fact do they not have to use things that are published?

Mr. PAINE. That is the thing. So we want to be in a position where Irving Berlin can say, "If you want to use this thing of mine, Mr. Victor Company, I will give you the right to do so provided you use 4, 5, or 6 others of mine." In other words we want to be able to stand up and realize that this monopoly which is being created and built up is not going to be used for the destruction of these independent publishing groups.

Mr. BRUNNER. Do you mean to tell me that if Irving Berlin writes a song that the Victor Co. can take his song and reproduce it by just paying him 2 cents?

Mr. PAINE. Absolutely.

Mr. BRUNNER. Without Irving Berlin's consent?

Mr. PAINE. That is all it has to do.

Mr. BRUNNER. And they do not even have to have Berlin's permission?

Mr. PAINE. NO. Under the operation of the compulsory license Victor can simply go ahead and take that, pay him 2 cents, that is all there is to it; and that is all the company has to use of Irving Berlin's works. In such a situation does the independent publisher find himself to-day with the continuation of this compulsory-license provision. It is not only destructive, but eminently unethical and unfair; and that is the type of competition that we believe we can be protected against by the passage of this act because then we have a proper checkmate and safeguard.

Mr. PERKINS. Let me interrupt you right there.

Mr. PAINE. Yes, sir. I see, however, I am not going to make a short speech after all.

Mr. PERKINS. It is not so much the length of the speech you make as it is what thoughts reach the minds of the members of the committee. That is what counts. Are any of these competitors, like Brunswick, Edison, and Victor opposing this bill?

Mr. PAINE. Yes.

Mr. PERKINS. Do all of them oppose it?

Mr. PAINE. Victor Co., Brunswick Co., and the Columbia Co.the other companies who have been so urgent in advocating the continuance of this act are not here. I suppose they are out of business. So the continuation of that provision has not been very helpful to them after all.

Mr. PERKINS. They are all competitors in their respective lines of the reproduction of mechanical music, are they not?

Mr. PAINE. Yes.

Mr. PERKINS. Do they object to their competitors taking their copyrighted material and using it for reproduction?

Mr. BURKAN. Yes.

Mr. PERKINS. Does the Victor Co. object to the Brunswick Co. taking it? How can they object to it? Can you tell the committee about that?

Mr. PAINE. Mr. Burkan points out that they may not take the product of another conpany. It is perfectly clear that the Columbia