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
Those are the only two limitations which affect the general public
until we come to this provision of the bill which increases the term
of the copyrights in different cases. As to them, of course the main
argument is made by the producer, the author, or artist. He is the one
who wants that addition to the term, and it is a matter of no great
importance to these general organizations of reproducers whom I
represent, one or two of them permanently and some only for the
moment. But we may fairly make these observations: First, I repeat
what was very clearly put by the Librarian yesterday, that the
copyright is simply in the form of an idea, as the patent right is in
the idea itself, and that consequently there is never like oppression
to the public from the monopoly.
If I have a patent on a needle with the eye in the point, nobody in
the country can use that until my patent is out, and that is a great
oppression. If I write a book about a needle with the eye in the
point, or about anything else under the sun, my idea, for what it is
worth, is at everybody's disposal when my book is published. He can
not copy my form, but whatever good the idea does him in his own
thinking or his own work he has. That is the first consideration which
has always actuated Congress and all governments, so far as I know, in
making the copyright term much more extensive than that of the patent.
Then the next is a practical consideration which I think must be
within the knowledge of every member of the committee, and that is
that for practical purposes in most cases the public gives up nothing
by extending the term, for the reason that at the end of forty-two
years a very great majority of copyrights--I hesitate to say how large
the majority would be--has become worthless. As a matter of fact, it
is familiar to every member of the committee that people do not
reproduce books that have fallen into the public domain by the expiry
of the time of the copyright, except in very special cases of
particularly popular works. So that in most instances the public would
not be giving up anything really in adding to the end of this term a
certain number of years.
Then, next, there is the consideration that in practice it is true
that the public does now get the fullest opportunity to buy cheaply
(which, I think, must be the only interest of the public as
distinguished from the interest of the different producing classes)
because books start at a certain price and at the end of a year they
go down below that price. At the end of two years there are new
editions at perhaps half the price, and in a very few years the
publisher is making every effort to attract the public by every
reduction that is 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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account