Arguments before the Committee on Patents of the House of Representatives, conjointly with the Senate Committee on Patents, on H.R. 19853, to amend and consolidate the acts respecting copyright: June 6, 7, 8, and 9, 1906.United States. Congress. House. Committee on Patents
History
Arguments before the Committee on Patents of the House of Representatives, conjointly with the Senate Committee on Patents, on H.R. 19853, to amend and consolidate the acts respecting copyright: June 6, 7, 8, and 9, 1906.
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Patents
Copyright -- United States
Mr. DAVIS. There is a paragraph further over, section 25, page 18,
which provides that anyone who shall knowingly and willfully infringe
the proposed copyright "shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and
upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for not
exceeding one year." Now, if I proceed "willfully" to exercise my full
rights as vested in me by my existing patents in defiance of the
conflicting and unconstitutional copyright grant proposed, then the
copyrighter can put me in jail for a year and during my incarceration
and during the entire life of my patents make, use, and sell my
machines under the provisions of subsection (_g_). It is no
misdemeanor for one inventor to infringe the patents of another
inventor, no matter how frequent and willful such infringements may
be; then why imprison an inventor for infringing a usurping
copyrighter. Supposing such infringements are innocently made, then
wealthy and unscrupulous corporations, such as the Æolian Company,
through their unscrupulous lawyers, will succeed in jailing many poor
and innocent inventors. It is hard enough now for most inventors to
keep out of the poorhouse and the courts; don't add to their present
hardships.
Senator SMOOT. Mr. Davis, of course you mean that that would happen if
you published something after the passage of this act that was
copyrighted? This act plainly says, in section G: "Any work published
and copyrighted after this act shall have gone into effect." It does
not affect anything at all that you have done before?
Mr. DAVIS. Yes; but it applies to machines that I have already
invented and which I may use after this act, according to my patent,
to mechanically reproduce any music of the past, present, or future.
Mr. WEBB. It does not apply to pieces that you play on those machines
now, though, even if they are now copyrighted, does it? It only
applies to pieces copyrighted after this act goes into effect.
Mr. DAVIS. My machines, those that I have been inventing and patenting
for years, are specially adapted to reproduce, or may be specially
adapted and arranged to reproduce any particular piece, whether
copyrighted to-day or hereafter. Under the Constitution, as I
understand it, I have the right to use anything that is not a writing,
a readable writing; and I have gone ahead under the Constitution with
the full reward therein provided as an incentive for my work. The bill
covers not only pieces or controller records, but also the machines
which they actuate.
Mr. WEBB. You do not understand, though, Mr. Davis, that this act will
destroy any of your vested rights at present, do you?
Mr. DAVIS. I do, sir; as I have explained, though perhaps not clearly.
Mr. WEBB. When it says that it shall only apply to works published and
copyrighted in the future? It only applies to works copyrighted and
published after this act goes into effect, and I do not see how it can
affect any vested right which you have on account of your past
investments.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account