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
When recess was taken and the gentleman was leaving the building,
I called him aside and emphatically took exception to the remarks
referred to. As one attending but not participating in the last
two conferences held, I think it no more than fair and just and my
duty to express to the joint committee the fact that Mr. Putnam's
course throughout the conferences was fair, just, and equitable to
all interests represented, and that every interest concerned was
invited to present its views.
The interests were varied and frequently antagonistic, and Mr.
Putnam was decided in his expressions that every representative
should be heard to the fullest and freest extent, and that after
the wishes of those interested was ascertained he was confident an
equitable bill would be the outcome; that while it might not be
satisfactory in every respect to each, yet he felt positive that
with the assistance of the Department of Justice, the Treasury
Department, and the cooperation and counsel of the American Bar
Association, and the Bar Association of the City of New York, no
interest or line of industry, whether represented or not, would be
unjustly or unfairly treated. His attitude in all of the
conferences was in the highest degree dignified and impartial.
To my positive knowledge the trade journals, as well as the
newspapers, contained full information concerning the copyright
conferences and the proposed copyright bill as long ago as
February, 1906; yet the gentleman referred to claims that the
conferences were star chamber proceedings for the benefit of
selected private interests. No interested concern could have
failed to become acquainted with the fact that the conferences
were being held, and no one seeking admission was denied
opportunity to present his views.
This statement is made solely for the reason that the unjust,
unfair, and undeserved criticism of Mr. Putnam, known to me to be
absolutely true, has stirred my deepest indignation, and I present
this protest to the committee and ask that the reflections upon
Mr. Putnam be stricken from the record.
Sincerely, yours,
LEO FEIST.
STATEMENT OF FREDERICK W. HEDGELAND, ESQ.
The CHAIRMAN. Whom do you represent?
Mr. HEDGELAND. I represent the Kimball Company.
I wish to state, gentlemen, that three or four days ago I first
learned of the introduction of this measure. I have heard what the
advocates of this bill have said with reference to there being one
side to this question. There are really four sides to this
question--the public, the composer, the manufacturers of the automatic
musical instruments, and the inventors that have made that industry
possible.
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