The morning call., 1894-06-04
RELATING TO COPYRIGHTS.

Congress is petiLioned 10 amend our
present copyright so as to more fully pro-
tect the rights of authors to their work and
of managers to dramas they have pur-
chased. Nothing can be said in disparage-
ment OF the justice OF the proposition that
every writer. whether of plays, operas,
novels or other literary work which is not
saared, should be secured in the full en-
joyment Of the profits of such work, or of
the justice of the proposition that sale
of such work should carry to the pur-
chaser all the rights of Property the author
possessed. But difficulty arises in the
way of SECURING such rights by legislation
in the lack Of definition as TO what shall
be considered raw material of plays. a
writer has a right of property in his own
work, but he can hardly claim a right of
property In all the work he may feel at
liberty to appropriate. 1t has been said Of
Boucicault that he never wrote an original
play and never revised play that he did
not improve. But the fact OF his selecting
a work to revise did not make it his own.
The revision was his, but the original work
remained in most cases open to other
dramatiSts. In the list OF authors who
want the copyright law revised are several
who have done nothing but work over old
material. Some of the plays TO which they
have attached their names are taken bodily
from foreign dramatic works. There are
in the United States from three to five
adaptations Of popular French and
German plays. Each adaptation differs
a little from the other. but very
often the real value of the play lies
in the original. Is each one of these
adapters to be invested in complete own
eTship Of his borrowed material as we'll as
OF his own work? Under our present law
there is no trouble about securing eXclu-
sivs rights to strictly original plays. The
trouble lies in determining to whom APP
proprated foreign work belongs. And in
cases where no foreign material is used,
or at least not in a way that can be Ie-
galy defined, there is a common source of
material which creates confusion as to
ownership. Is the first writer to get a
play on the stage to be given sole right to
material which dramas in real life may
furnish? MAY not a second or a third
author be allowed TO improve upon the
work of the first? AS to managers and
dealers in plays they certainly cannot pur-
chase any right 10 play the author does
not possess. They may purchase his work,
but not the raw material which the writer
has put in shape for stage represent ation.
To be of real value to authors, managers
or actors the proposed amendment should
be preceded by a clause defining what is
the raw material OF plays; at what point
may Al author consider the work of earlier
writers a fair source OF dramatic lnspira-
ton. Plays can be copied or adapted
without such a reproduction OF incident
and dialogue as will throw the adaptation
or copy out of court. Ideas are not Things
in which the property right may be defined
as in a watch or an oVercOat. To what an
extent may an author work in what may
be termed an inspirational or fundamental
idea and still assert exclusive ownership
in the play which may result from his
work on a borrowed idea? When that
question is definitely and authoritatively
answered Congress may proceed 10 amend
the copyright law.