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
The bill is the result of a sincere attempt, as we have seen it, to
frame a reasonable general statute. I say "sincere," and I feel the
right to say it because I followed the conferences closely, and had the
best opportunity to judge of their temper and disposition. If some of
the interests were selfish in one direction, they were met by the
selfishness of others in another direction, and both were under
criticism from the general advisors and under the influence of the main
body. And neither such interests--and I am speaking of history now, of
course--neither such interests nor any other participant in the
conference initiated the conference, nor determined its composition,
nor controlled its proceedings. The conference was initiated by the
Copyright Office at your suggestion, Mr. Chairman. It was composed of
organizations invited by the office, and it was theoretically held in
the office. The Librarian presided at it, and except for the purpose of
some formal resolutions it never organized or in any other way passed
out of the control of the office.
If the bill reveals some selfishness, it is perhaps condonable. It is
the selfishness of men trying to protect their own property; for of
course, as I have emphasized, the interests that were especially
invited to the conferences were those that are concerned in an
affirmative way with the protection of the right. The conferences were
not generally representative--completely representative--in other
respects. The bill has that purpose--that is, for the protection
particularly of the property. It comes before you for consideration on
the ground that it goes too far. It does not create, of course, a new
species of property; it merely recognizes a species of property created
by the Constitution and already recognized by statute. Its purpose is
simply to secure to the man who has created it a species of property
which peculiarly requires the protection of law, because the very act
which makes it remunerative to him lays it open to expropriation--that
is, the act of publication--and seems peculiarly entitled to the
protection of the law, because it is that act, and that alone, which
makes it of any use to the public; and of course it secures this
protection--not permanently, but only against untimely expropriation.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account