St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-03-15

no practical obstruction upon the use OF tneil
contents in Terre Haute."
Voorhees-'sNo the Indianapolis morning
papers are struck off about $3.50 or in the
morning. The evening papers come out
about four o'clock
Watterson-'sThat illustrates US fairly.
took Terre Haute as a very good example,
because it is close to city using large
part of the Associated Press matter"
Representative Singleton-''You say a
newspaper goes to press at 8 O'Clock. What
time do they issuel'
Watterson-''An early copy of a newspaper
may be bought or stolen five minutes after
going to press.'
Singleton-"Suppose a paper at Vicks-
burg or New Orleans comes out, say at
eight O'Clock. Would not the correspon-
dent of that paper, be prevented from tele-
graphing that news or would it not operate
to that eXtent!''
Watterson-"Let US take an illustration.
A publishes a paper at Vicksburg and pays
for Associated Press matter or for that OF
any other association. B publishes news
paper and does not pay cent to anybody
for his news. Now should this besh
Singleton; interrupting-''I am not speak
ing OF the justice of the matter. Would il
not prevent papers publishing it at
o'clockl"
Watterson-''very few, if any, daily news
papers are published so late as that. They
usually go to press in Vicksburg at o'clock,
that is or Z o'clock in New York. The
| difference in time would enable q newspaper
in Vicksburg which proposes to live by
piracy to steal and publish its matter for the
mere cost of telegraphing and type setting.
! IL IL nraoicp no inf at yr-bi cI,
| aimed. 1t would affect no newspaper which
didn't propose to obtain its matter by rob-
| bing; it could not possibly affect newspapers
paying for thier news"
Singleton-''Who do you understand by
the constitution is enabled to take out the
copyright! Is it the author or the man who
purchases from the author?"
Watterson-At the suggestion of the chair
man of the convention, l struck out a section
of this bin, narrating and specifying the mode
and persons who should take out the copy
right. Senator Sherman thought it would
put an additional duty upon the librarian Of
congress, and upon the United States courts
which were specified in the section. sup
pose that the publisher who is or who repre-
sents the owner of the newspaper is the per
son entitled to protection.
Representative Woodward-''As defendant
or plaintiff"
Watterson-"As plaintiff"
A colloquy ensued as to the constitutional
power of congress to grant copyright to any
person other than the author orinventor. The
law was read, and found to give this right to
proprietors in express terms. Librarian
Spatford who was present, remarked, that
about two-thirds of the copyrights issued, are
to proprietors. A suggestion was made by
Senator Hoar that the measure required an
amendment, SO as to designate the person
in whose name this right should vest.
Watterson said, any firm which would
secure the ends proposed would be accept
able.
Mr.. Voorhees-"Col Watterson, do you
think there is sufficient abuse, that it is a
grave enough abuse to call for this legsla-
tion?n
Watterson-" Yes, sir, l think that the in
creased facilities for newspaper reproduction
give very great temptation for the use OF
pirated matter. In my opinion this species
of robbery is decidedly on the increase
Continuing, Watterson said, 81 cannot sec
why congress should refuse its recognition OF
new class of property, which modern inven
tons, the telephone, telegraph and railroad;
have brought into being"
Senator Hoar, asked, "Why the purpose Of
the promoters of the bill could uot be accom-
plished by providing simply that the present
copyright law should extend for eight hour;
to all daily and weekly newspapers, without
filing copy of the publication with the libra
rian of congress!"
Watterson said the object was to prevent
concurrent publication, and whatever would
best accomplish that would be acceptable.
Representative Nutting called Watterson's
attention to the assertion frequently made
that the purchaser of paper becomes the alb
solute owner of its contents, and asked him
what he thought of it.
He replied that the purchaser of copy OF
a newspaper has morally no more right to re-
produce its contents for concurrent sale than
the purchaser of book has the right to re-
produce and sell it. In both cases the buyer
procures copy for his own private use, moi
for the multiplication and sale of it in com
petition with the original publication
The fact that book il
published by law, and newspaper is not, fur
nishes a reason for the enactment of thi.
bill. In conclusion Watterson said, the
bill under consideration did not affect wha
are called county newspapers one iota
1HOlC Was, ic Sdlu; liz supPOSdDIC CoHul'
ton in which, as a practical question, they
could be affected by it. He had ransacked
his imagination unsuccessfully for some
| conceivable way in which an infringement
of the proposed bill could benefit the county
press. Nor did it affect the afternoon papers
The misrepresentation in the public mind
had grown out of the original suggestion
that protection should cover a period Of
! twenty-four or forty-eight hours, which sug
gestion was inconsiderate and untenable.