Document: 351 U.S. 570 76 S.Ct. 974 100 L.Ed. 1415 Marie DE SYLVA, Petitioner,v.Marie BALLENTINE, as Guardian of the Estate Stephen William Ballentine. No. 529. Argued April 25, 1956. Decided June 11, Mr. Theodore Kiendl, New York City, for petitioner. Max Fink, Los Angeles, Cal., respondent. Opinion Court by Justice HARLAN, announced BURTON. 1 The present Copyright Act1 provides a second 28-year copyright after expiration original term, if application renewal is made within one year before term. This right to renew appears in § 24 Act: 2 'And provided further, That case any other copyrighted work, * author such still living, or widow, widower, children author, be not then author's executors, absence will, his next kin shall entitled and extension work further term twenty-eight years when have been office duly registered therein prior *.' 3 In this case, an who secured on numerous musical compositions died time apply renewals arose. He was survived widow illegitimate child, are both living. question presents whether that child share copyrights which come up during widow's lifetime. 4 Respondent, child's mother, brought action behalf against petitioner here, seeking declaratory judgment has interest already renewed those will become renewable her lifetime, accounting profits from renewed. District Court, holding meaning 'children' used statute but rights belonged exclusively gave widow. Agreeing with first point, Appeals reversed, death shared copyrights. 226 F.2d 623. Because great importance these questions administration Act, we granted certiorari, 350 931, 307. 5 controversy centers around words 'or living.' Two involved: class, order enumeration, (2) they take does include child. Strangely enough, never decided, although statutory provisions involved part Act their form since 1870. 6 contends that, she alone exclusive author. is, interprets clause providing passing rights, only If word 'or' follows 'widower' read its normal disjunctive sense, unreasonable interpretation statute, might well mean there no 'widow' 'widower.' hardly unambiguous, however, problems solved literal 'normally' used. must whole, putting each proper context unable say, should, clear purport same it 7 We start proposition often careless substitute 'and'; phrases where 'and' would express thought greater clarity. trouble us long time: see, e.g., United States v. Fisk, Wall. 445, 18 243. instance, need look than very section example usage: '* widower executors italicized disjunctively, persons named 'be It clear, do succeed unless all dead, preceding at least explicit 'widow, author' death. more accurate, therefore, were 'author, children.' argued some force, then, secceeding grouping question, should way well. done, easy step succeeding held did. 8 traced development several statutes enacted country. See Fred Fisher Music Co. M. Witmark & Sons, 318 643, 63 773, 87 1055, could make binding assignment expectancy future renewal. federal May 31, 1790, Stat. 124, did allow anyone except 1831, new passed, family February 3, 436. Section provided: 9 'That if, aforesaid years, citizen States, resident therein, being left children, either continued *, or, fourteen (Italics supplied.) 10 significant instituted scheme allowing death, 'widow children,' rather separately. Petitioner concedes under took class. marked major phase legislation created system which, basic form, even statute. 11 88 July 8, 1870, 16 212, consolidating language 1831 important change section: given children. follows: 12 he living 13 became 4954 Revised Statutes, amended 1891, 26 1107, deleting requirement States. otherwise intact. provision appeared 23 March 4, 1909, 35 1080, without 17 U.S.C. 24, U.S.C.A. 24. 14 Knowing, do, can ambiguous this, difficult say 1870 had effect changing, did, children's effective There legislative history, passed subsequent sessions Congress, indicate Congress fact intended respect existing distribution rights. Rather, what scant material indicates substantial changes intended.2 seem unlikely framers interested compressing somewhat cumbersome phrasing simply deleted 'and child' remaining phrase children' expressed precisely result, leaving unaffected almost forty years. 15 1909 Act. By now added death—the children—the kin. Each classes separated condition precedent namely, class deceased. As noted, died, maturing But expected drafters widower' defining succession placing lower occupied widower. Granting structure due carelessness adding section, think may nevertheless taken indication time. Solicitor General filed helpful brief Register Copyrights, amicus curiae, administrative practice Office discussed. Regulations issued force until 1948 (when Regulations, touching issued), allowed along treated widower.3 register claims lifetime practice, frankly admitted, result decision doubt over confident treating widows, widowers, members Although ordinarily give weight agency charged administration, cf. Mazer Stein, 347 201, 211—213, 74 460, 467—468, 98 630, Office's explanation deprives therefore rely instance. associations briefs point out 'universal' light alone, obviously overstatement. Nevertheless, long-standing consistent attitude specialists field law, adequate basis exists hesitate overturn generally accepted view having consequences. cannot escape conclusion reliance misplaced: far recognized ambiguity, applications many qualified commentator concluded class.4 Nor possible suggests, satisfy congressional purpose hold argues contemplating situation taking care gives control presumably capable dealing likely income. branch argument, becomes much diluted observed deceased woman, disposes manner male. value depends appreciable extent ability convey publication construed diminish scattering ownership, transfer title. One difficulty argument ignores recognizes, divided ownership between surviving spouse What asked avoid, policy grounds, successor embodies earlier saw fit effectuate changed discernible display dissatisfaction policy. type use, guide interpretation, unwillingness attribute results face harsh, constitutional difficulties, so extraordinary unambiguous wording required. Cf. Minker, 179, 281. legislation, transfuse gloss own choosing, especially choice alternative policies close one.5 19 While matter think, balance, adopted Appeals, copyright. II 20 come, included scope course, content determined state, law. Reconstruction Finance Corp. Beaver County, 328 204, 66 992, 90 1172; Board County Commissioners 308 343, 351—352, 60 285, 288—289, 84 313. true deals familial relationship; law domestic relations, primarily state concern. 21 who, apparent general To decide kin, requires reference State legal relationships. 'children,' describes purely physical relationship, also status unlike others. determine legally adopted, example, proper, draw ready-made body define use entirely strange familiar ordinary usage, permissible variations concept deen controlling. Seaboard Air Line Railway Kenney, 240 489, 36 458, 762.6 22 raises two questions: first, look, second, particular State, State's defines relationship. answer difficult, record concerned California, parties assumption. less clear. An acknowledged father, writing signed presence witness, 255 California Probate Code7 inherit father's estate mother's. found here terms section. Under legitimate purposes, however; compliance 230 Civil Code8 necessary full legitimation, allegations complaint sufficient bring Hence, 'adopted' sense regarded Considering purposes described Code. evident provide Since assign family's takes compulsory bequest designated persons. really descent property, controlling heir extent, 'children.' Finally, remains respective renewals, once neither court below it, decided 25 For foregoing reasons, affirmed. Affirmed. 27 DOUGLAS, whom BLACK joins, concurring. 28 question. course laws Hutchinson Investment Caldwell, 152 65, 68—69, 504, 505; Poff Pennsylvania R. Co., 327 399, 401, 603, 749. I protecting dependents better served uniformity, diversity flow incorporating into forty-eight Clearfield Trust 363, 367, 573, 575, 838; National Metropolitan Bank 323 454, 456, 65 354, 355, 89 383; Heiser Woodruff, 726, 732, 853, 855, 970; Standard Oil 332 301, 307, 67 1604, 91 2067. 29 benefits Federal Death 46 761 et seq., Middleton Luckenbach S.S. 70 326, 329—330, Second Circuit said: 30 'There inheritance here. confers recovery upon dependents, benefit estate, our standards morally support. Humane considerations realization origin compel construction day conditions, social warrants different early English view. object continue support casualty. parents act defeat act. conferred beyond beneficiaries society's welfare making dependent. rule bastard nullius filius applies cases inheritance. Even considerable advances toward giving illegitimates capacity admitting them possess inheritable blood.' 31 approach and, regardless dependency benefits. 32 With exception, join opinion Court. 61 652, Cong.Globe, 41st Cong., 2d Sess. 2680, 2854 (1870). 37 CFR, 1938, 201.24(a): 'Application subsisting by: '(1) living; '(2) '(3) executor, '(4) kin.' 48, Bulletin (1913); 46, (1910). See, Chafee, Reflections Law Copyright, 45 Col.L.Rev. 503, 527; Kupferman, Renewal Copyright—Section 44 712, 717; Tannenbaum, Practical Problems Analyzed (CCH) 7, (1952). Nicholson, A Manual Practice, 195, 196; De Wolf, Outline Law, 66. specifically allocation, interests copyrights, division children; nor allocate 'next provision, persuasive aid relies McCool Smith, Black 459, 218 means actual 1862, consider 70, 505, 38 356. 'Every person writing, competent acknowledges himself inherits whole part, be, born lawful wedlock; represent father inheriting kindred, lineal collateral, unless, intermarried, marriage, him adopts family; deemed succession. mother mother's collateral.' 'The publicly acknowledging own, receiving such, consent wife, married, family, thereby such; thereupon birth. Chapter adoption.'

Category: 7