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. CROMELIN. Fifth. That it is class legislation in the interests of
the few as opposed to the enjoyment and happiness of the masses, whose
rights seem regularly to have been lost sight of during its
preparation, and that it is particularly vicious when the rights of
the poor are considered.
Sixth. That in so far as the question of copyright must of necessity
be viewed from an international standpoint, it is inadmissible,
intolerable, and distinctly un-American to grant to foreign composers
the right to extract toll from every American citizen where such right
is denied such foreigner at home in his own land and is denied to
American composers abroad.
I hope during the recess to explain my connection with this matter. I
was the representative of my company in Berlin, Germany, for four
years, and had occasion to appear in this very matter; and I want to
warn you gentlemen against what happened there. I trust that freedom
will be given to all mechanical musical instruments and that no Æolian
monopoly will be able to tack on a provision which will give them
perforated-roll rights and exclusive rights. I propose to show that
this monopoly is not of a national character, but the attempt to
create it is an international conspiracy.
Seventh. That such legislation is directly contrary to all recent
legislation in foreign countries, the most important of which is the
act of the German Reichstag in 1901, by which perfect freedom is given
to use copyrighted works for the purpose of mechanical reproduction;
and by which, by reason of an interpretation announced by the minister
of justice prior to the third reading of the bill, the right to record
and reproduce any copyrighted work by means of talking machines was
expressly permitted.
Eighth. That such legislation is contrary to the spirit of the Berne
convention.
Ninth. That in no other country is substantially like protection
afforded to composers, but that such protection has been universally
denied.
Tenth. That even if such rights were granted under the laws of Great
Britain, Germany, France, Belgium, and other countries, which they are
not, it is beyond the power of Congress to do other than that which it
is expressly permitted to do under our Constitution, and the only way
by which such a law could be enacted which would stand the test of the
highest court of judicial inquiry would be by an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States. On behalf of my company, I protest
against being plunged into such long and expensive litigation as would
necessarily ensue if this bill becomes a law, unless the necessity for
the same is urgent, and this I emphatically deny.
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