The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1900-01-21
COPYRI0Hr IN PHOTOGRAPHs.
Recent Federal Decisions Constituting tho
Law Here-Certain Limits Defined.

Law uSre-SeTtuIu IsIulI's utuutu
The law Of copyright it its application to photo
graphs Is being interpreted through recent de-
cisions ~ the Federal courts nearer to the evident
intent with which II was enacted. The purpose
Of the law in declaring a property right in photo
graphs was to enable n person photog raphed TO
retain control over his or her printed likeness and
10 prevent unauthorized use Of it in publications
or otherwise. The law had been turned So far
from is original purpose that people rarely heard
OF a person photog raphed seeking its protection
for his or her own sake, while attempts by photog-
raphers to mulct publishers who had used copy
right Photographic often unwiuingly, have been
80 frequent as almost to bring the law to scandal.
The laws mandatory provision that for the In
firing ement Of the copyright 81 should b. paid to
the holder OF the right for each reproduction OF the
photograph, made IL possible in the case of pub
locations Of large circulation for a ~litigious holder
OF a copyright to descend upon publishers with
ruinous claims,
This was so well understood that many more
cases oil infringement were settled out OF court
than came to trial. so as to avoid the expense
and annoyance Of litigation and sometimes the
high damages which the letter Of the law ordered.
In the case of a newspaper these damages would
be punitive beyond the intent OF the lawmakers.
II has been testified 10 In court In this city that
many OF these outside settlements have been
made. II a man or woman photographed had
been injured little objection would have been
heard, but usually the effort was by . photog-
rapher 10 collect alleged dam AGA n his business
In England. as in this country. litigation Increased
rapidly after the extension Of the copyright law
10 cover photographs was made,
The work Of reducing the exorbiant damages
possible in collection for infringement Of the law
N regard to photographs was begun last month,
The Supreme Court, In the case " BollrS against
Outing, declared that the penalty specified in the
statute could only BE- recovered for each copy Of
the infringement which at III" time Of the an
n~ouncement Of the action was found by the photog-
raphsr to. bs In the possession Of the magazine
and available for seizure, and that no penalties
can be collected for such copies AZ had been pre-
viously distributed and sold"
This disposed Of the opportunities 10 mulct
publishers In 81 for each copy Of Il Photograph
used, which, in the case Of some publications,
and ruin for the publisher. even II he had done
no real damage and though the person photo
graphed was neither injured nor offended, On
Dec, IA another decision in a Federal court defined
further the line OF demarkatiOn between injuries
and privileges which the law intended To confer
and the damages which photogr pliers, who
might, under certain circumstances, share in
the laws benefits have sought TO show and in
one way and another To recover penalties for.
Suit was brought in Denver, in the United States
Circuit Court, by the Detroit Photograph Com
bookseller, of Denver, from selling copies Of a
colored photograph Of The Palisades and Alpine
Pass" made by W. II. Jackson in a publication
sold by Mr.. Thayer entitled Colorado In Color
and Song" The point was raised whether "A
man could claim a copyright in a photograph
Of natural scenery, even II he colored 1t himself,
Judge Hallett ruled that "A photogrHp phi OF natural
scenery is not the subject OF copyright, because
II Is not an original conception Of the artist. II
is merely a skilful. manipulation Of the camera
Further, IL Is not shown that there was any orig
inahty about the coloring Of the photograph in
question, and 1t was shown in the defence that
the result achieved was old and In common prac-
uoe."
Last week the question Of the application Of
the Copyright law 20 photographs came up in
the United States Circuit Court for this district
before Judge Wallace and a jury. The Copy
/ right Leagues counsel, lewenson, kohler &
Schuttman instituted a suit for 5000 damages
against Fucker, Levett 4 Loeb. who make a
household preparation that has been advertised
by a poster IN. which appears a woman's figure.
1t was contended that the figure was reproduced
from a photograph Of a chorus girl In a Broad.
way theatre Which had been made and copy,
that he had mode the photograph, that he had
instructed the young woman how TO pose to msks
the picture artistic and that he had then copy.
righted the photograph. He brought one of lie
photographs 20 court.
The defence, represented by Simpson q Werner,
s ssssys saA Sy an ,b sa ,f fTnm E,B BSs't I d %iiIam had ,i seen
g~raphers: that they had supposed the design origi
nal, and that they had ordered several thousand
posters Tor use IN cars. So soon a. some Of these
had been put In the street cars a clerk Of the prose
cutting law frni. with a summons and com PLANT
and accompanied BY a United States marshal
called on the defendants, who Were advised, one d
| tntiu Nd.i, w CrNu' 'u' NidAil Hitlt IT NllIfllUL
Of the Copyright law. This suggestion tho dc
PENDANTS decided not 10 comply with, not believing
that they had violated the law, and holding thai
if 1t had been violated the publishers Of the posters
the photographers were the ones who had i~nfringec
the copyright Their counsel contended thai III,
photograph in question was not artistic and wa,
not a prop.r subject for copyright This issu,
Judge Wallace gave 20 the Jury 10 determine q,
a matter OF fact The jury decided for the de
PENDANTS. II the precedent set by this case stand,
IL may be found that the copy right on photograph,
Of stage and platform celebrities is without yaiu,
The United States marshal found 5000 of III,
posters which il was alleged infringed tho Schlus.
copyright IN the possession Of the defendants, ant
under the mandatory provision Of the COpyrigh
law this would have enabled the recovery VI S., 900
SChlpsS testified on CrOss-sxdminatlOn That he hat
taken out copyright on many photographs o
actresses, and that a number Of suits for infringe
ment had been instituted by him, most Of whicl
had been settled out of court.
Most Of such claims in this country have rested
IL is said, on a decision In n suit hrough. som,
years ago by the late Napoleon Sarony concerninG
a photograph Of a British Hsthete, whose mann
attracts little attention now. The decision govern
ing in England since copyright extended 10 photo
graphs was given IN 1883 IN the case Of Polar
against tho Photograph Company. A few year
ago the London Times published letters whicI
showed the great number Of claims made in tina
country after tbs enactment Of the Law creatin,
a copyright in photOgra phs. The recent decision
IN this country would seem 10 indicate a diminutlal
OF such claims here IN the future.