New-York tribune., 1907-12-13
COMPOSERS NOT INJURED.
Currier Bill an Line With Legislation
IN All Countries.
To the Editor of The Tribune.


Sir Referring TO your article in to-days issue
entitled Fight Copyright BILL" and to the inter
view with Victor Herbert permit me to give you
herewith brief statement showing how the fight
bring mechanical reproducers of music within
the domain OF copyright now stands in this and
foreign countries Since this was printed the bill
referred in your article H. r. 243, has been in
troduced by Mr.. Currier, chairman Of the House
Committee Patents. One would suppose, to read
Mr.. Herbert's comment that Mr.. Currier proposed
TO deprive composers Of existing rights, and That
If passed legislators going to deal a
death blow to the art of music The facts are:
First-That composers have no such rights in this
country and never have had.
Secona-That they enjoy'no such rights IN foreign
countries. with the possible exception OF Italy,
where a case involving the question is now pend
ing before the italian Supreme Court
Third-That In every other country where the
subject has been the matter of legislative action
laws substantially the same as the Currier DILL
H. K. 243 have been passed
Fourth-That in every other country where the
subject has the matter of litigation the courts
have decided that mechanical reproduction or
sound is not q writing. That the sound records
In conjunctor with the various machines are only
dead and meaningless things taken apart from
the instruments themselves. that they do not con-
stitute in any sense edition of the music. and
that they are merely means Of producing the
music and that they do not in any sense in1ure
the composer nor violate any rights to which he
Is entitled.
Fifth-Mr. Currier and his associates in Congress
know pretty well what they doing when they
propose to pass law which practically follows
the language used in the British musical copy
right law of 1906, which also expressly makes the
right mechanically to reproduce musical sounds
to the ear free to all. They know of the con-
tracts which have been made In advance by GER
tain anufacturers and the music publishers trust,
whici, would through the passage OF such law
fr Herbert wants grant to small group
monopoly of the mechanical musical instrument in
dustrv for the next thirty-flve years. They know
Of the attempts to deceive the committees of
Congress and 70 make 1t appear that the legisa-
fion was really in the interest of composers They
know and Mr.. Herbert knows that the statement
that the mechanical reproducers injure the sale
OF the sheet music and deprive the composer
Of royalties TO which he has been accustomed Is
untrue. They know that by an overwhelming pre-
oonderance of evidence the facts are just the op-
aosite and that the greatest factor in the enor-
nous increase which has taken place In the SAFE
,f sheet music in recent years is the mechanical
-.nroducer in its varied forms. phonograph rec
ords music box sheets and piano player rolls
The members OF Congress know these facts ana
their answer to the men who went 10 Washing
ton last winter and tried to pull the wool over
the ewes of the members of the House and SEN
ate Committees Patents is Mr.. Curriers' new
copyright bill
This Is exactly what happened in England after
a fight lasting eight years. eliminating In the
passage Of the so-caled T T. OConnor MusicsA
Copyright bill. August 1906
The Senate Committee on Patents has not yet
acted. but It looks now II history will repeat
itself and the little group which hoped TO ex-
plot the American people for their own private
1T, ,-a 1ikeIv 10 realize the truth OF the Scot
tish bard's lines:
-- hes. laid schemes mice and gang aft s-gley
And leave us naugt grief and pain for promised Joy
PAUL. H CRoMELIN.
President American Musical Copyright League.
New York Dec u, 1901