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
Under the bill as it is proposed now, if the author secures a
continuation or a renewal of his copyright, and the publisher is not
consulted the publisher would be left with his set of plates and his
investment in the sheets and stock; and it would be absolutely
impossible for him to sell them to anybody, because his contract
having expired, and the author may have gone and made a new contract
with a new publisher, leaving him entirely out of it. If there is no
copyright whatever he can compete on equal terms.
I am only explaining why I think the publisher ought to have some
consideration under those circumstances.
Mr. CURRIER. What do you say to the amendment suggested by the
gentleman who last spoke?
Mr. SCOTT. Just what was that amendment?
Mr. CURRIER. That the publisher might have the right to control the
extended term, provided he would pay the same royalty that he had
paid.
Mr. SCOTT. I think the publisher ought to be obliged to pay the same
royalty that anyone else should pay at that time. It might be a very
old work. It might be that the time during which he could continue to
pay that royalty had expired.
Mr. CURRIER. You could hardly set the right up at auction, could you?
Mr. SCOTT. I am sorry to say it is very often done.
Mr. CHANEY. Would you not think that would give the publisher an undue
advantage over the author?
Mr. SCOTT. I think the law as it is at present framed is very broad. I
only wish to say now that I think the publisher ought to be consulted.
I suppose this will come up later, and I have not prepared any
argument on the subject. I am only pleading that the publisher ought
to have some consideration under those circumstances.
Mr. CHANEY. Can not the publisher provide against all that by the
contract he makes?
Mr. SCOTT. There will be no trouble about the copyrights taken out
after the passage of this bill. It is only with reference to
copyrights that are now in existence.
Mr. CHANEY. Yes.
Mr. BONYNGE. You think the language of the bill as it is is too broad?
Mr. SCOTT. I think so. I think I should not have made it, myself,
quite so broad.
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