Arguments before the Committee on Patents of the House of Representatives Part 16

With best wishes, we remain,

Yours, very sincerely,

JOS. W. STERN & CO.

_To the Committee of the Senate on Patents, Senator Alfred B.

Kittredge, of South Dakota, Chairman._

GENTLEMEN: I appear before you this morning in the name and as the representative of the firm of Jos. W. Stern & Co., music publishers, of New York, and in their behalf I wish to state that the bill on copyrights S. 6330, to amend and consolidate the acts representing copyrights, which is before you this morning, is of the highest importance, for the protection of the authors and composers and music publishers, to protect their copyrights.

The old law is very vague and unsatisfactory. The proposed new law would help music publishers and composers very much.

There has been a great deal of piracy going on and their best "hits" have been copied and pirated.

The new law makes such piracy a criminal offense, punishable by fine or a year imprisonment. If pa.s.sed, as we hereby most humbly pray that it should be so, it will punish the pirates, because the fine alone can not stop their unjust deeds, and they laugh and pay their fine, but a year of imprisonment will certainly change all for the best. The said pirate would not risk a year of prison at all times.

Then again, the new law provides that no phonograph company or any makers of musical instruments, as well as makers of self-playing pianos, can deliberately use the work of the brain of the composer as well as the property of the publisher without permission to do so or paying some remuneration for the same.

Imagine the injustice of the thing. A composer writes a song or an opera. A publisher buys at great expense the rights to the same and copyrights it.

Along comes the phonographic companies and companies who cut music rolls and deliberately steal the work of the brain of the composer and publisher without any regard for the said publisher's or composer's rights.

They sell thousands and thousands of the "hits" of the publisher, which he has worked hard to make, without paying, as stated before, a cent of royalty for them.

The new law proposed remedies this, but of course the phonographic companies are fighting the new bill tooth and nail.

In this brief outline I shall include another important statement to show how much work, and anxiety of the brain a composer must use to write something in poetry or music, and what anxiety and worry he endures until the said "hit" is an accomplished fact.

Sometimes his entire family depends upon the publis.h.i.+ng of this brain work, and when it is accepted and the publisher issues the same for the public's appreciation, behold, in the next few days every sort of instrument is playing this man's composition.

I for one have suffered this injustice and piracy. Therefore I feel how dreadful it is in general to suffer and to be deprived of remuneration for the just and intelligent inventive brain work which a man produces by his genius.

This is, gentlemen, an excellent opportunity to show fair play to a body of citizens who have been working at a disadvantage and fighting for years for their just rights and for proper and adequate protection from the Government. I conclude by appealing most earnestly and respectfully to the honorable gentlemen of the committee to do their utmost to forward the pa.s.sage of this bill, and I am convinced that they will earn everlasting thanks and grat.i.tude for creating a law which will earn for them recognition and will carry their name to history for having worked for the advancement of an industry which has been sorely oppressed by piracy and injustice.

Believing that my most humble indors.e.m.e.nt of this new law and the desire of the firm of Jos. W. Stern & Co., who have authorized me to address this body in their behalf, will soon be upon the statute books protecting copyright, I have the honor to remain,

Very respectfully, yours,

D. P. LEWANDOWSKI, M.D.

34 EAST TWENTY-FIRST STREET, _New York City_.

A. W. ELSON & CO., EDUCATIONAL ART PUBLISHERS, _Boston, June 5, 1906._

HERBERT PUTNAM, Esq., _Librarian of Congress, Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C._

DEAR SIR: As I do not expect to be able to be present at the first hearing of the copyright bill which is now introduced in Congress, I write to ask whether the suggestions that are made on the accompanying sheet can be placed in the hands of the committee.

I should like to appear in favor of these suggestions at any subsequent hearing that may be given by the committee on the bill.

I have arranged the suggestions in the order of importance from my own particular standpoint.

As this may reach you during or after the hearing before the joint committee of the Senate and the House, I have mailed a duplicate of this to the chairman of the committee.

Very truly, yours,

A. W. ELSON.

_Suggestions of additions and amendments to the copyright bill introduced before Congress May 31, 1906, ent.i.tled "A bill to amend and consolidate the acts respecting copyright."_

_Section 5 (subsection J)._--That the words "and negatives" be added after the word "photographs," so that subsection J shall read: "Photographs and negatives."

Negatives are made the subject of copyright under the present copyright law, and there seems to be no valid reason why they should be omitted in the new copyright statute. It would very much simplify the copyrighting of all photographic reproductions if negatives were made the subject of copyright, and for the purpose of registration two prints of the negative copyrighted should be filed in the copyright office. I would therefore suggest that the following words be added to section 11, seventh line, after the word "edition," "or if the work be a negative, two prints made directly from it."

_Section 13._--In this section typesetting and the lithographic process are singled out from all other processes connected with the manufacture of printed books, and given distinct protection from foreign compet.i.tion over all other processes in making books that are copyrightable in the United States. Any such discrimination is unjust, and if this section is retained, the protection should be broadened to include any other processes besides lithography.

I would therefore suggest that section 13 be amended as follows: After the words "lithographic process," in the seventh line, and after the same words on page 6, first line, nineteenth line, and thirtieth line, there be inserted the words "or any other process or method," and after the words "a process," in the same line, the words "or method."

That the word "lithographs" in the second and third lines of the same page be erased, and the word "ill.u.s.trations" be inserted in place of it; and on the same page, in the third line of that portion of section 13 on that page that the words "where" and "either" be erased. My preference would be to see the whole section dropped out, but failing in this no undue preference should be shown any one or two methods connected with the manufacture of books.

_Section 39._--In its present form could be made clearer if it is intended to secure to an author of an original work of the fine arts any copyright which he may have obtained under the statutes on his work. On the other hand, if the section is intended to secure to an author or artist any potential copyright in a work on which he had not duly secured statutory copyright, then such provision, it would seem, would be unreasonable and unjust to the purchaser of the work; and I would therefore suggest the following wording for this section: "The author of any original work of the fine arts being the owner of such a work and having copyrighted it according to the provisions of this act or any previous United States copyright act, and who has marked upon such original work such notice of copyright as may be required by the act under which the work was copyrighted, shall not be deemed to sell or transfer said copyright upon selling or transferring the original work of art unless an agreement in writing covering the transfer of said copyright be signed by the author."

_Section 37._--Is open to the same criticism as section 39. It might be corrected by the following changes, viz: That in the third and fourth lines the words "which is the subject of copyright" be struck out and the word "copyrighted" subst.i.tuted for them.

_Section 8._--In providing the conditions under which a foreign author or proprietor of any work may obtain copyright on such work within the United States, section 8 grants certain privileges to a foreign proprietor which are not granted to an American proprietor of a foreign work; as, for example, an American proprietor of a foreign painting who desired to copy and publish it in this country.

I would therefore suggest that section 8 after the words "provided, however" in the fifth line and through subsection (_a_) read as follows: "That copyright secured by this act shall extend to the work of an author who is a citizen or subject of a foreign state or nation only when such author or the proprietor of the work (_a_) shall be living within the United States at the time of the making and first publication of the work or shall contemporaneously with publication in some foreign country publish the work within the limits of the United States."

A. W. ELSON, _146 Oliver street, Boston_.

NEW YORK, _June 4, 1906_.

HERBERT PUTNAM, Esq., _Librarian of Congress, Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C._

DEAR MR. PUTNAM: I regret to find myself, after the strain of breaking up my home, totally unable to attend the meeting of the Senate and House committees on the 6th. In fact, it is out of my power to go to Was.h.i.+ngton this week for either the formal or the informal discussions.

It seems to me that my time of active work, relative to copyright, is about ended; and possibly I ought to resign from the presidency of the American Copyright League. I am no longer the president of the National Inst.i.tute of Arts and Letters, Professor Sloane having become my successor. I think the later draft of your bill is in excellent shape as a basis for consideration by the joint committee.

Respectfully, yours,

EDMUND C. STEDMAN.

LEO FEIST, MUSIC PUBLISHER, _New York, June 1, 1906_.

Hon. HERBERT PUTNAM, _Librarian of Congress, Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C._