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
I wish to call the committee's attention to the fact that the
above testimony was taken to prove the opinions expressed by two
witnesses for the plaintiffs were in error when they stated as
their opinion that the mechanical player was detrimental to the
sale of sheet music. Note the lawyers for the White Smith Music
Publishing Company did not dispute the facts by not
cross-examining these witnesses. The plaintiff is a big music
publishing house and influential members of the Music Publishers'
Association, with all the evidence and aid their association could
lend, could not and did not attack these undisputable facts. It is
a coincident worthy of your close attention that W. M. Bacon, a
partner in the plaintiff's firm in this case and also of the
copyright committee of the Music Publishers' Association, who was
leader of the prosecuting forces and signally failed to prove that
this industry did other than to improve the sale of music, now
comes to your committee with a copyright measure framed by his
associate on the copyright committee of his association.
Mr. G. W. Furniss, who is chairman, presented it and had it
drafted in at the first conference, at which they both were
present, and they were at every other conference to guard their
conspiracy; conspiracy I say, because Mr. Bacon's firm has a
contract (and his lawyers had to so stipulate), identical to the
contract filed with your committee, between a publisher and the
Æolian Company. Read the contract; they have conspired against the
composer and against the public for an undue personal gain,
grafted what they wanted in their copyright measure, and now come
to you gentlemen with it under the guise that the composer is
being robbed of his dues by automatic devices. I submit it is a
prima facie case of the principals to this contract not only
planning to sweat the composer, but to hold up the public. It is a
conspiracy in which the copyright office has aided them, possibly
innocently, and they have asked your assistance, the public funds
paying the expenses, the same public they want to get under their
grasp. I can prove every word of this at any time. Is it not time
Uncle Sam should arouse?
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