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. O'CONNELL. It is simply by relation to what is called the tracker
board. This roll goes over a tracker board in which there are little
holes. Each hole in the tracker board is connected with a little tube
which carries the air through a bellows and to a device which strikes
a hammer. As this roll goes over the tracker board of the instrument,
when it strikes a hole corresponding to any particular one of those
slits there is an ingress of air, because there is a vacuum
underneath. That little tube is connected with a hammer which strikes
the note A, B, C, and so forth, whatever it might be. They are
differently arranged in different rolls. The roll that will play in
one instrument will not play in another; and you can see, gentlemen,
that there is a different-sized roll, different-sized slits
[exhibiting sample rolls] notwithstanding that they are both the same
piece of music, composed by Mr. Sousa. [Laughter.]
Senator SMOOT. In looking at those two rolls, there is no question but
what anybody can tell that they are the same piece of music.
Mr. O'CONNELL. But look at the difference across----
Senator SMOOT. That is only as to the size. You can take that same
sheet of music that Mr. Sousa exhibited and have it four inches wide
or you can have it eight inches wide, and it would be just the same
music.
Mr. O'CONNELL. But can anybody tell me, if you please, sir, or will
anybody tell us, what those notes are?
Senator SMOOT. That is the question that I asked you.
Mr. BOWKER. I can, by taking a scale corresponding to that instrument
and putting it on the paper. By doing that you can tell what the note
is.
Mr. WALKER. I was counsel in the Apollo case, and the question whether
those rolls could be read by inspection was litigated at great expense
in that case, and the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit
decided, a week ago last Friday, that the overwhelming preponderance
of the evidence was that they could not be read.
Mr. WEBB. And further, that that is not a copy of the music from which
it is taken.
Mr. WALKER. They so decided. Judge Colt decided in 1888 that these
perforated rolls are not copies of music filed in the office of the
Librarian of Congress. That decision was always acquiesced in until
the Æolian Company invented its ingenious scheme to monopolize the
business of mechanical musical instruments; and in pursuance of that
event they endeavored to secure from the circuit court of appeals in
the southern district of New York a reversal of Judge Colt's decision.
After years of litigation the circuit court of appeals for the second
circuit affirmed Judge Colt's decision, and held that these do not
infringe the copyright on the sheet music, and, as the foundation for
that holding, they stated the overwhelming preponderance of evidence
was that they could not be read by anybody; and they stated for that
reason that they were not copies, and were not infringements.
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