New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-12-13
AN AUTHORS SYMPOSIUM.

HOW LONG SHOULD COPYRIGHT IASTf
Advocates of a new copyright bill IN Ensianu
are boninr TO secure copyright for the lifetime
=, Tho author and for thirty years afterward. In
France the period of fifty years Is ADDED 10 tha'
t. u,h,oh tho author himself enjoys his priv
ileees In Spain and Italy 1t is eighty years
Tho question as 10 how long copyright should
,aet has been nut by the London Academy 10
. nur,ber n, English authors. From the replies
ouoted hollow It is evident that Sir waiter
pasen+ cannot count on the support or all witt
ore tor the contention that copyright should
last forever
M uerhert Spencer In 1877 when com
mission on copyright was sitting arsueu III
favor of the duration now propose1L'hs
tbor's life and thirty years after ms uea.n'
Certainly I think fifty years AFTER ms death
would be better, since IT would nearly always
cover the possible life Of his widow me CUES
ton Of perpetual copyright nave '0' WI
Mr.. Frederic Harrison: In my, opinion. the
proper period for the duration OF literary copy
rigbt should be seven years from registration;
DIR F. J. Furnivall l think copyright is qu,te
long enough now. and that authors ousn' 10 oo
grateful to the public Tor MAKING ,neI, r,e
Let 60 much longer than those or patentees'
who deserve lust as much protection as authors.
II is only writer's conceit that makes them MINK
themselves so valuable; and nothing shoui' nc
done 10 encourage their delusion.
Mr. G. Bernard Shaw: The proposal or per-
netral copyright is a piece Of rapacious impu.
dence Would it benefit anybody II tne neirs Oh
John Bunyan were now wallowing IDLY IN roy
alties on 1.-The Pilgrims Progress instead Oh
working honestly for their living?
Considering that an inventor who enriches tne
world is granted patent rights for fourteen years
onIv II is not clear why an author who possibly
debauChes it. should get from thirty 10 over one
hundred years copyright. The present term is 700
long except in a very few special cases TOT
which extension should be granted on applica-
tion TO the courts If the descendants or au-
thors want copyrights, they can earn 'helh oS
writing books.
NJ w l. courtney: | do not think perpetual
copvrght is acknowledgements book, being a
national possession. ought to he mace accesSi ,
TO the nation. Nor can | think ii ieasloie; pe
cause an authors descendants VIII DC ei'hei
lost or drift into other families
think copyright should extend FOR Two gene1
aions-say sixty years roughly. ana lee
it's duration in the hands Of any single puplishe'
should be limited, say, to six or ten years.
Mr.. Rider Haggard: ] imagine that most Peo-
ple interested would be satisfied with durlns
the authors lifetime and thirty years Inns
IN the vast majority of cases, would mean
copyright of at least sixty years. ana IN many
cases Of eighty or one hundred-after that-.
Mr. Edward ClOdd The books needing pro-
lection under copyright are not so much those
whose success is rapid but those for whlch'
after long years of neglect and slow SAFE, DC
mand, with steady and often increasing Saie'
arises Take e. e. Merediths works, FftzGer-
AIDS Omar Khayyam," etc. Hence Woulu
grant copyright for at least three generations;
Nj
nernetual is the counsel Of perfection; perma-
nent nossession of an artistic product is far
more defensbe than permanent possession oI
land of raw materials of manufacture or Oh the
manufactured article. But II is counsel vi
perfection which lies outside the range OF prac-
tical politics At the very least however une
term of copyright should be extended so as 10
nroft should the right be a source or pront, the
descendants Of the holder TO the third genera
tion Many works only become prontable from
half century to a century after the authors
+I,a,, only ar
classics and benefit by forced sale consequent
unon their introduction into the educatlonai
curriculum of the country: II is scandalous that
the writer should not he ahle 10 leaNe ulis s
chance of wealth to his descendants, or should
not be able to discount it during his hietlme
which he can only do If the purchaser or MS
rirht has the assurance of a heightened term
during which to enjoy it, 1t now happens that
almost the only writer who can sell his copy
RIGHT TO advantage Ia the one who. from the
etandnoint of the permanent Interests OF litera-
ture and humanity, deserves the least CONSIDER
alton and protection-viz, the ephemeral nov
elist. - oa
Mr. Anthony Hope: In reply to your ques-
lions. | think; ,,
That perpetual copyright is not desirable II
would he compatible with the public interests
only under the most stringent safeguards, ana
would not be a good form OF hereditary prop
ertv as It would entail neither duties nor re-
spOnsibility. ,,,.
That the term proposed In the new bill Is sat
isfactory and should, for the present at least.
be accepted by authors. In the great maJorny
of cases il would give material increase on .he
present term. and ii covers the time during
which mans immediate descendants are nat
urallv dependent on the results of his labors
II might be however that some slight extern
sion of the term would be found deslraple ioI
uniform. have not looked into this point