The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-03-06
Copvriphting News.

On Tuesday Mr.. SHERMAN introduced
into the United states Senate Mr.. WAITER
SONS famous bill to copyright news matter.
Il Is announced, too, that Mr.. TUCKER Will
introduce the same bill into the House OF
| Representatives. II does not follow that
either Mr.. SHERMAN or Mr.. TUCKER VIII
vote for this ridiculous proposition.
Read the bill
4" Be Il enacted, ETC., That any daily or
weekly newspaper. or any ASSOCIATION OF
daily OF weekly newspapers, published IN
the limited States or any OF The Territories
thereof. shall have the sole right to print,
issue. aud eell. for term OF eight hours,
dating from the hour of going to press, the
contents of said daily or weekly newspa-
pers. or collected news OF said newspaper
association exceeding one hundred words"
Il win be seen at once that the whole
question OF the efficacy OF the bill to pro-
tect news-gathercrs turns upon the word
/" CONTENTS" so far as individual newspa-
pers are concerned, and upon the words
"collected news " so far as any association
Of newspapers is concerned.
What is "colleeted news! Is 1t a
thing capable OF being protected by law!
Let us suppose that newspaper associa-
ton had been organized in Richmond
before the fire OF last Thursday in Man
chester: what could that association nave
copyrighted with reference to that fire? We
cannot imagine that Congress would pass
law intended TO enable persons or jour-
nalists 10 monopolize the news. This
supposition is out Of the question. There
were hundreds OF persons az the scene OF
the tire in Manchester, and many thou
sands not far of. Every one OF these
persons had the right to pen an ac-
count OF the fire, and send that
account to any paper in Richmond,
or Petersburg. or Norfolk, or Lynch
burg. There arc afternoon papers
in all these cities. Surprising such sta
tute had been in force, would 1t have
been a violation Of the law If any one OF
the afternoon papers in the cities named
had given its readers the particulars of the
fire in less than eight hours after the Rich
mond State had given them to its readers!
Could any jury that could be empanelled
in the United States, not composed OF abso-
lutte idiots, be induced by any means to
give q verdict for damages against Lynch
burg, Norfolk, or Petersburg paper, under
such circumstances OF course not.
Nobody has a right to copyright facts
patent to everybody. Nobody has right
to copyright the fact that murder has
been committed. or the fact that fire has
occurred, or the fact that an accident has
happened. 1t would be prepOsterOus to
set up such a claim. What, then, is there
that could be copyrighted under Mr..
SHERMAN's bill? Nothing except the mere
form OF words in which the news might
be clothed. II on the one hand this
is all that is TO be copyrighted, the act OF
Congress will be utterly valueleSs to the
news-gathcrcrs. Ii on the other hand facts
are to be copyrighted, the bill will never
reach the dignity of an act OF Congress.
Now as to the word contents" 1t in
cludes the advertisements IN paper! The
bill is TO protect the "contents " Of indi-
vidual papers aud the " collected news" OF
journalistic associations. The word " con-
tents" therefore, includes not only tele-
grams. letters, and ordinary items Of news,
but marriage notices, obituary notices. ma
rine reports, and advertisements Was so
a bill ever before introduced
into eli her house of Congress? AS Con-
gresham HAMMOND, Of Georgia, is re-
ported to have said, "there is no warrant
in the Constitution for it,"