The republic., 1851-06-10
Foreign Copyright In England.


Foreign Copyright in England.
ExcHEauER CHAMBER, SATURDAY. May II.
Sittings in Error-Present, Lord Campbell, and
Justices Patteson, Maule, Wightman, Cresswel,
Erie, and Williams.
BoosEY us. JEFFERys.
Mr.. BovILL said this case came before the
court by way of bill of exceptions to the ruling
of Baron Rolfe. The object was to bring under
review the decision Of the court of exchequer
in the case of ''Boosey Us. Purday'--to raise
the question whether there could be any copy
right for foreigner in this country, or whether
such right could be vested in any person who
purchased OF that foreigner. There, was an
| other question, whether there could be any as
sgnment by foreigner of portion of the copyright
to be confined to Great Britain, and whether an as
signment made in Milan ought to hive been at
tested by two witnesses. The facts were these:
Boosey English subject; he had purchased
the copyright in La Somnambula of a foreigner,
and having purchased that right was the first
person to publish it in this country He had
thus prima Jucie title against the world; that
title sought to be impeached by the de-
fendant, and his ground for doing that
the work which he had purchased, and was
the first to publish here, was originally composed
by Bellini foreigner, out of the British domin-
ions. Bellini had transferred his interest in the
work to Ricordi, at Milan. Rcordi came to Eng
| land and transferred the right which he had SO
| acquired to Boosey, SO far regarded the copy
right in the British dominions. The main ques-
ton was, whether English subject could ac-
quire from foreigner the copyright of work
which first published in this country If
foreigner could acquire copyright, he could
transfer such right, and if he had right, could
he not give such permission to an English subject
as to enable the Englishman to acquire the right
to protection On the other side it was said there
was property in the foreigner or in the English
subject; but it was now submitted that such
work was property before the statute of Anne, and
by the common law The 9Th Anne the first stat
ute passed for the protection of property Of this de-
scripton--o of literary property.
MIR. Justice MAULE.-SupposcH Homer had copy
right, be could go about and recite his works.
Lord CAMpBELL.-And might have had an in
junction,
Mr.. BovILL.--H there was the copy of one cffu-
sion of mana brain he might withhold it, or lend
it, or dispose OF il. The statute of Anne was de-
clarcd to be for the encouragement of learning by
vesting the copyright in the author of literary
works, and it enacted that after ITO the author of
any book, who had not transferred il to any other,
or the bookseller who had purchased it, should have
the right. II the right existed in the author an
alien was entitled equally with natural born sub
ect. If it was property it was selfcyidcnt alien
was entitled.
Lord CAMpBELL.-In personal property the law
made distinction.
Mr. BoviLL.-By 7th and Sth Victoria, chap.
&c, aliens might hold any description Of personal
property. If foreigners had a right by common
law, how they affected by the statute OF Anne'
Lord CAMpBELL.-Suppose foreigner came over
to the Great Exhibition, he wrote poem,
would he not have right to that poem?
Mr.. Justice MAULE.-Or suppose he wrote very
amusing article about it in French paper
Mr.. PEACOCK said, the difference was to the
place in which he wrote it.
MIR. BovILL.-If the foreigner had the light, what
difference did it make whether he wrote it here or
elsewhere!
| Lord CAMPBELL.-He was encouraging our agr-
culture and manufactures by consuming our pro-
duce while he was writing the poem.
| Mr.. BovILL.--If the test were property or no
| property, it could make difference, and it could
not alter his right whether he broughti here him
self or gave it to deputy; and if he could do that.
he might transfer it to another, and give him the
same right which he himself possessed. But it was
said that the statute Of Anne had been passed for
the encouragement of native talent; but it was OF
| equal advantage to this country that should
have the benefit not only of the first publication OF
works of British subjects but the literature of the
world
Lord CAMPDELL.-That ar rgumcnt extends to free
| trade.
MIR. Justice MAuLE.--A book written by for
eigner may be published with as much benefit il
written by an Englishman.
Mr.. BovILL said the enactments were for the
encouragement of learning, to be applied to the
public. He could find no reason why the right
should be confined to British subjects The learned
counsel then sdvertcd to the first Richard, and to
the art OF printing.
Lord CAMPBELL. If you go to the exhibition Of
painting, you will see very excellent painting OF
Edward Nv. and his queen visiting Caxton's print
ing establishment at Westminster, where Richard
III. appears as Duke of Gloucester.
Mr.. BoviLL said the result of the authorities was
that foreign authors might have this benefit. If il
was admitted that these works property, thcr
there was difference between foreigner and an
Englishman. In the of wild animals
Lord CAMPBELL said, stealing lion, suppose
would not be larceny; but there might be action
of trovcr.
Mr.. Justice MAuLE. II might be tanned lion
not that shoud be inclined to commit the lar.
something like wild goose chase.
MIR. BovILL was about to proceed when
Lord CAMPBELL sad made my bow OF graft
tudc to you, Mr.. Bovill, for your very excellent
argument; butt thought you had sat down.
MIR. BovItL, amid great laughter, said he had
but a few words to add. He submitted that he had
made out the proposition that this work was prop
erty at common law, that foreigner had right
to the copyright, and that the plaintiff in error was
entitled to Judgment.
Mr.. PgAcocK on the other side, would not die.
pute that portion OF copyright might be sold
or that foreigner might be entitled to copyright
in this kingdom, that a foreigner. If he had a
copyright, might recover damages for its infringe.
rnent, but he should contend that, under the par
ticdlar circumstances Of this case tho plaintiff had
not copyright His proposition was that a for.
eign author residing abroad, and not coming to
this country, had no right, 80 long he resided
abroad at the time of the frat publication, to claim
protection. Where the first publication, and