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
Now, come down to subsection G, "works of art." There is another item.
Now, that word is much broader than "writings." I have made a good
many works of art myself. Everybody that invents a complicated machine
produces a work of art and a work of high art. There are a great many
works of art here in this room which could not by any possible strain
of language be denominated "writings." There is a perfectly plain case
of attempting to copyright, under this statute, a work which is not
also a writing.
Mr. CURRIER. What change would you suggest in subsection G?
Mr. WALKER. I have formulated such a change as that, but it would take
a little time to explain it.
Mr. CURRIER. Very well. Take your own course.
Mr. WALKER. I am very glad to be at the disposal of the committee, but
it would take me five minutes to explain. It is a very important
point.
Subsection H covers "Reproductions of a work of art." There is a
perfectly flagrant case of attempting to copyright not only a thing
that is not necessarily a writing, but also a thing that is not even
original; whereas the Supreme Court has told us over and over again
that nothing can be copyrighted that is not original.
Now, go over to the next page, page 4, Class L:
Labels and prints relating to articles of manufacture, as
heretofore registered in the Patent Office under the act of June
18, 1874.
That was the very act that the Supreme Court held fifteen years ago
was unconstitutional as not authorizing copyright on things which are
not writings. So that there is a recommendation to this committee to
reenact a law that the Supreme Court has expressly held to be
unconstitutional.
Now, come, if you please, to the second page of this bill. The first
section of this bill enumerates exclusive rights to be covered by
copyright. Subsection C is:
To deliver, or authorize the delivery of, in public for profit,
any copyrighted lecture, sermon, address, or similar production
prepared for oral delivery.
Mr. CAMPBELL. What page is that?
Mr. WALKER. The top of page 2.
Senator SMOOT. Subdivision C.
Mr. WALKER. (Reading):
To deliver, or authorize the delivery of, in public for profit, any
copyrighted lecture, sermon, address, or similar production
prepared for oral delivery.
A lecture could be copyrighted under this statute without any copy
ever being put even into typewriting, as I stated a little while ago,
and that copyright could be maintained for a year, when the discourse
has no existence whatever except in the mind of the man who delivers
it, and in the ears of those who heard it, and in the air that
transmitted it from the vocal organs of the lecturer.
D--To publicly perform or represent a copyrighted dramatic work.
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