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
Section 4 is absurdly broad and indefinite and covers pastry or
other works of a cook. It should be amended by inserting the word
"literary" before the word "works," or by substituting the word
"writings," which is used in the Constitution and is the
preferable word to employ, or by inserting after the word "works"
the words "mentioned in section 5 hereof."
In section 5 paragraph (h) should be eliminated. This paragraph
was intended to cover perforated music sheets or talking-machine
records which are to be otherwise provided for. As to other
matters it may be said that if the reproductions referred to are
copies of things already copyrighted, they are infringements; if
not copies, they are works of art in themselves under paragraph
(g) of section 5.
On page 4 "The above specifications shall," in line 8 and line 9
and line 10, to and including the words "nor shall," should be
canceled, and in line 11, after "classification," insert the words
"shall not."
It is obvious that an unlimited subject-matter of copyright is
highly undesirable from the standpoint of the public.
In section 6, line 15, after "compilations," insert "or," and in
the same line strike out "or other versions." These words are
plainly unnecessary and are intended to have a capability of
elastic interpretation unduly favorable to the author and
prejudicial to the public.
In section 7, paragraph (b), the words "of a work" and the rest of
line 6 and lines 7, 8, and 9, to and including the word "text,"
should be canceled. If a work has fallen into the public domain,
even though subsequent to 1891, it would be retroactive to now
bring it within the copyright law and deprive the public of its
use.
Section 8, paragraph (a), in the interest of clearness should be
amended by striking out the words "or cotemporaneously" in line
21, and by inserting after line 22 "shall publish his work within
the limits of the United States cotemporaneously with its first
publication elsewhere; or."
Section 9 should be amended by inserting after the word "Act,"
line 14, the words "and by the performance of the other conditions
precedent mentioned in the act, and by entry of the title of the
work as hereinafter provided." It is plain that a person does not
"secure" copyright by the publication with notice, which is all
that is mentioned in this section.
Section 10, line 24, the words "and such registration shall be
prima facie evidence to ownership" should be struck out. There
does not appear to be sufficient reason for giving a mere
assertion of claim the prima facie standing of absolute ownership.
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