PROGRESS OF COPYRIGHT LAW. 341 



report contains matters auxiliary to the "opinion," the preparation of 

 which involves much literary labor and skill ; such as a "syllabus" of 

 the case, or brief statement of the points of law decided ; a narrative 

 of the facts involved in the trial ; a condensed statement of the argu- 

 ments ; and, perhaps, a foot-note collating other decisions germane to 

 the subject. A majority of existing law reports have been com- 

 piled by the reporters in the expectation of taking out a copyright 

 and realizing a profit upon sales. The practice of paying a reporter a 

 salary, now very common, is of recent introduction. Lately complaint 

 was made on behalf of an official law-reporter who had no distinct 

 salary, but compiled the reports relying on the copyright as his com- 

 pensation, that a rival publishing firm were issuing a condensed edition. 

 The publishers argued that the reporter's work was official, and not a 

 subject of copyright. The judge said he thought an officer enjoying 

 a salary for his work probably ought not to claim a copyright, but one 

 who worked for the copyright as his compensation ought to be sus- 

 tained in it. The publishers also showed that they had. instructed 

 their editors to draft new head-notes and narratives of facts. The 

 judge said he could scarcely see how new editors could in fact compile 

 these parts anew unless they consulted the original records. It was 

 not shown that they had done this ; moreover, the judge's comparison 

 of the two books led him to think that the editors had in fact used 

 the reporter's work to a considerable extent. The decision was in 

 favor of the reporter's claim. It is noteworthy that a decision ren- 

 dered half a dozen years ago, though published recently, declared that 

 a reporter could not claim copyright in head-notes furnished to him by 

 the judges as part of their official duty. 



Upon the death of Lord Beaconsfield, the London " Times " pub- 

 lished an elaborate memoir. Some one reprinted it in a penny pam- 

 phlet. Of this the proprietor of the " Times " complained ; but the 

 publisher of the pamphlet said that he had the right to issue it 

 because the " Times " was not copyrighted. Now, the copyright 

 laws do not mention newspapers by that name ; they allow copy- 

 l-ighting " books " ; when newspapers are copyrighted, it is done upon 

 the idea that the term " book," liberally understood, includes a 

 newspaper. For the proprietor of the " Times " it was argued that a 

 newspaper like the " Times " is not a proper subject of copyright ; 

 and that, there being no copyright law available for articles in news- 

 papers, the publisher has "a common-law right "a natural property, 

 independent of statute by virtue of which he can forbid any one 

 else from reprinting them. There is said to be a former English de- 

 cision to this effect. But the judge decided, in respect to the Bea- 

 consfield memoir, that the "Times" newspaper can be copyrighted, 

 and that it should have been, in order to sustain the claim made. He 

 sanctioned the little pamphlet. 



Many of our readers know the two books " Monitor Post-Office, 



