New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-06
Republicans are in these days berated by Free
COPYRIGHT REVISION.

Serious objection is made by both authors and
publishers to the Copyright Revision bill now
under the consideration Of Congress. The text
OF the measure has already been published In
our columns, and comment has been made upon
certain features Of II which seem to some ex-
tent commendable. The idea Of appointing
Commissioner or Register OF Copyrights Is
good one That would relieve the Librarian OF
Congress Of burdensome task and enable him
to give all his attention to the Library, as he
should do. 1t would also, no doubt, expedite the
issuing of certificates Of copyright, and the gen.
eral business Of that important bureau. The
proposal to publish weekly bulletins and yearly
catalogues Of all works entered for copyright
is to be commended, and so, too Is that to extend
the term Of years for which copyright s grant
ed. All these things may be regarded as mere
amendments 10 the existing law rather than re-
visions Of It, They might well be adopted with
out changing In any respect the general condi-
tons on which title to literary and artistic prop
erty Is now granted.
There are other features Of the BILL however
which would materially change those conditions,
and not fer the better They are so mischievous
In their intent that the strongest protests against
them are amply justified. Take for example,
the proposition to restrict to citizens OF the
United States the privilege OF securing copy
right Upon what ground can that be justified?
Other property rights are not thus restricted
The foreigner may send hither drygOods or hard
ware for sale. or may own houses and lands
here. and his title to them will be respected and
protected. Why should his title to the products
of his brain be otherwise treated? On moral
grounds. then. this proposition Is most repre-
hensibe. as II step backward toward freeboot-
ing and robbery. On legal and diplomatic
grounds II Is no less bad. We have now Il
reciprocal agreement with the chief nations OF
Europe. under which each country grants to
citizens Of the others full copyright privileges.
II this bill should become law that arrange
ment. so far as America Is concerned, would be
broken up. Americans would be unable to OBJ
tain copyright in Europe, and we should be actti-
ally further back in darkness and barbarsm
than we were before the enactment OF 1891.
The enlargement Of the list Of articles which.
10 be copyrighted, must be wholly manufactured
within this country would also be backward
step. and would probably In itself be sufficient
to destroy the whole system Of international
copyright To limit To $1,000 the total amount
10 be- collected in any case for infringement OF
copyright il grossly ineluiabe. No such beg
carly limit Is imposed In other cases OF trespnss
upon property rights. Why should 1t be In this
case? There ere books the writing. editing and
publication ~ which cost hundreds OF thousands
Of dollars Are we 70 decree that any one may
manufacture pirateI editions Of them Mt VIII
and not be liable for more than $1,000 damages!
We might ju.t rs we'll say that not more than
$1,000 shall ever be recovered for injuries done
10 real estate, or buildings. or personal property.
or limb or life The fact Is. this bill, In the
particulars we have enumerated. discrmnates
against literary and artistic property AS com
pared with other forms OF property aud any bill
,ha, does that should be defeated For that Is
the principle II the Odtime piracy? That Is the
principle against which, for more than hfty
wears the advocates Of copyright have been
fighting II Is too late in the nineteenth century
10 revive and rchabllitate II now. The principle
~ these days Is tina, property rights III the
products Of the mind must be respected Just as
much as In products Of the hands and that prin-
cplc must never be- abandoned.