105 



COPYRIGHT. 



COPYRIGHT. 



200 





Mechanical contrivances for enabling a person to write with two 

 pens or pencils at once, on different sheets of paper, on the principle 

 of the PANTOGRAPH, have been tried as copying-machines ; but they 

 are too complicated for ordinary use. All such machines, and perhaps 

 we might say even the copying-press, are far surpassed in convenience 

 by the manifold u-riter, an apparatus patented in 1806, by Wedgwood. 

 In this apparatus a sheet of paper blackened on both sides with 

 printers' ink, and dried for five or six weeks between sheets of blotting- 

 paper, or covered with some other black composition which will come 

 off when pressed hard, but will not move with a slight degree of 

 pressure or friction, is laid between two sheets of thin writing-paper, 

 and the whole is placed upon a smooth copper or pewter-plate. The 

 letter is then written firmly on the upper sheet of paper with an agate 

 style or point, the pressure of which causes the blackened paper to 

 produce two impressions of the writing, one, which is read through 

 the paper, upon the under side of the sheet directly acted upon by the 

 style, and the other upon the upper side of the lower sheet. More 

 than two impressions of the writing may be obtained by using two or 

 more sheets of blackened paper, interposed between several sheets of 

 thin white paper. This apparatus is conveniently fitted up in a small 

 portfolio, and occupies no more room than an ordinary writing-case. 



In a machine registered by Messrs. Mordan, a stamping-press is 

 combined with an ordinary copying-machine. When worked in the 

 customary way, the platten rises with the screw, leaving a space 

 beneath it for the copying process ; but by a little adjustment the 

 screw may be raised without the platten, leaving a die and counter-die 

 in proper position for stamping any device on letters, envelopes, or 

 paper. 



In 1855 Mr. Terry patented a copying-machine to be combined with 

 the cover of a book. The act of closing the book furnishes the means 

 for copying documents placed between the leaves. Outside each cover 

 is a metallic frame; one of these carries an inclined projecting piece 

 at each end, while the other has two or three links hinged to each end. 

 When the book is to be closed, the links are pressed over the inclined 

 projecting pieces, and may be thus held compressed for any length of 

 time. The pressure is sufficient to effect a transfer of ink as in a 

 copying-press ; but great rigidity in the frames is required. 



COPYRIGHT, or, as it was formerly termed, copy, has been defined 

 by Lord Mansfield, " to signify an incorporeal right to the sole print- 

 ing and publishing of somewhat intellectual, communicated by letters." 

 By this '' somewhat intellectual" is to be understood something pro- 

 ceeding from the mind of the person by whom, or through whom, 

 such a right is claimable. Yet, although mere republications of the 

 compositions of others are no subject for copyright, it is by no means 

 limited to such productions as contain new or original ideas. Thus 

 translations both from ancient and modern languages, notes and 

 additions to existing works, even compilations and abridgements, are 

 similarly protected. A to these last however it is often a question for 

 court* and juries to decide, whether the compiler or abridger really 

 intended to present the original matter in a more useful or agreeable 

 form, expended his own labour upon it, and so entitled himself to pro- 

 tection, or whether he only sought, under false pretexts, to defraud the 

 author or his assigns of a portion of their lawful profits. This decision 

 depends of necessity on the circumstances of each particular case. 

 Further, a right of copy attaches to the authors of ideas expressed by 

 other symbols as well as letters, to musical composers for example. 



The origin of copyright must be sought in the general conviction 

 which has always prevailed of its justice and expediency. " When a 

 man," says BlackHtone, " by the exertions of his rational powers has 

 produced an original work, he seems to have clearly a right to dispose 

 of that identical work as he pleases ; and any attempt to vary the dis- 

 position he has made of it, appears to be an invasion of the right. 

 Now the identity of a literary composition consists entirely in the 

 sentiment and the language. The same conceptions, clothed in the 

 same words, must necessarily be the same composition ; and whatever 

 method be taken of exhibiting that composition to the eye or ear of 

 another, by recital, by writing, or by printing in any number of copies, 

 or at any period of tune, it is always the identical work of the author 

 which is so exhibited, and no other man, it hath been thought, can 

 have a right to exhibit it, especially for profit, without the author's 

 consent." (' Comm.' Dr. KBIT'S ed., vol. ii., p. 414.) 



Accordingly it has been supposed that a common-law right of copy 

 existed in England previously to any statute on the subject. As a 

 legal proposition however this cannot be supported by the proper and 

 proof of a fair judicial decision before the passing of the first 

 statute relating to it in the reign of Queen Anne ; inasmuch as it never 

 appears to have been directly controverted up to that time. But, in 

 the absence of positive authority, it may be fairly inferred, from the 

 old charters of the Stationers' Company, and much more from their 

 registers, whence it appears that some thousands of books, even as 

 early a* the times of Elizabeth, passed from one owner to another by 

 descent, sale and conveyance ; from acts and ordinances of parliament 

 which necessarily imply a recognition of it by the nature of their pro- 

 visions respecting printing ; and from decrees of the Star-chamber, 

 which, though not binding precedents, are evidence of the opinion of 

 many learned men as to the then state of the law. It is further to be 

 noted, that the non-existence of express decisions on the point is 

 accounted for down to 1610 by the necessity of obtaining a licence 



prior to the printing of anything, so that authors had no occasion to 

 apply to civil tribunals for protection, as none but themselves and 

 those claiming under them were so licensed, and he who printed a 

 book without this was subject to enormous penalties. 



It has hardly been controverted in the various arguments that exist 

 upon this common-law right of copy that literary compositions in 

 their original state, and the incorporeal right of the publication of 

 them, are the private and exclusive property of the author. The 

 question made has been that this property was put an end to by pub- 

 lication ; and yet without publication it is useless to the owner, because 

 it is without profit, and property without the power of use or disposal 

 is not property. In that state it is lost to society as a means of im- 

 provement, as well as to the author as a means of gain. Publication 

 is therefore the necessary act and only means to render such a pro- 

 perty useful to the public and profitable to the owner. If, says Lord 

 Mansfield, the copy which belonged to the author before publication 

 does not belong to' him after, where is the common law to be found 

 which says there is such a property before. All the metaphysical 

 subtleties from the nature of the thing may be equally objected to the 

 property before. It is equally detached from the manuscript or any 

 physical existence whatsoever. There is in fact nothing in the act 

 of publication to vary the nature of the right, so that that which is 

 necessary to make a work useful and profitable should be taken as 

 destructive at once of an author's confessed original property against 

 his expressed will. It has accordingly been the almost unanimous 

 opinion of the high authorities who were called on to decide the point, 

 that by the common law of England authors were entitled to copy- 

 right, and as there was nothing in statute or custom to determine it, 

 or distinguish this from other species of property, that such right was 

 once perpetual. The arguments for the contrary opinion are collected 

 in the judgment of Mr. Justice Yates in the case of Millan v. Taylor, 

 4th Burrow, p. 2354. 



From the above premises arose the qiiestion, after the passing of the 

 first statute respecting literary property in 1710, whether by certain of 

 its provisions this perpetual copyright at common law was extinguished 

 for the future. After some less important decisions in the negative 

 on motion in the Court of Chancery and elsewhere, the question was 

 solemnly argued before the Court of King's Bench, during the term, 

 when Lord Mansfield presided, in 1769. The result was a decision in 

 favour of the common-law right as unaltered by the statute, with the 

 disapproval however of Mr. Justice Yates. Subsequently, in 1774, the 

 same point was brought under the consideration of the House of 

 Lords, and the decision of the court below reversed by a majority of 

 six judges in eleven, as Lord Mansfield, who adhered to the opinion of 

 the minority, declined to interfere ; it being very unusual, from 

 motives of delicacy, for a peer to support his own judgment ou appeal 

 to the House of Lords. It is somewhat remarkable, that although 

 this could be hardly termed a decision, as the judges were in point of 

 fact divided equally, it has since been held so important as a precedent 

 and sustained in so many subsequent cases, that it must now be con- 

 sidered as settled law that perpetual copyright is put an end to by the 

 statutes. And in a recent case, Jeffreys v. Boosey (4 Ho. of Lords ca. 

 815), the House of Lords has even decided that at common law no 

 copyright exists. 



The two universities were not slow to protect themselves from the 

 consequences of this decree in the case of Donaldsons and Beckett, and 

 obtained from Parliament, in 1775, the following year, an Act for 

 enabling the two universities in England, the four universities in 

 Scotland, and the several colleges of Eton, Westminster, and Win- 

 chester, to hold in perpetuity their copyright in books given or 

 bequeathed to the said universities and colleges for the advancement 

 of useful learning and other purposes of education. This protection, 

 sanctioned by penalty and forfeiture, so long as such books are printed 

 at the presses of the universities and colleges respectively, is still 

 enjoyed, unaffected by the general statutes on the subject ; and a 

 similar protection is extended to the university of Dublin by 41 Geo. 

 III. c. 107. 



The chief provisions of the 8 Anne, c. 19, entitled ' An Act for the 

 encouragement of learning, by vesting the copies of printed books hi 

 the authors or purchasers of such copies during the times therein 

 mentioned," as regards the effecting of that purpose, were, that the 

 authors of books already printed, and those claiming under the author, 

 should have the sole right and liberty of printing them for a term of 

 21 years and no longer ; and that the authors of books to be printed, 

 and their assigns, should have the same right for 14 years and no 

 longer. And the last clause of the Statute directed that after the ex- 

 piration of these 14 years the same right should return to the authors, 

 if living, for another 14 years. The persons infringing these pro- 

 visions were to be punished by forfeiture of the pirated book to the 

 proprietor, and a penalty of one penny for each sheet, one-half to go 

 to the crown and the other half to the informer, provided always the 

 title to the copy of the book had been duly entered with the Stationers' 

 Company. 



The 41 Geo. III. c. 107, which extended the same law to Ireland, 

 gave a further protection to authors and their assigns by action for 

 damages and double costs, and raised the penalty per sheet to three 

 pence, to be divided in the same way. 



The 54 Geo. III. c. 156, enacted, that the author of any book, and 



