Page:The copyright act, 1911, annotated.djvu/26

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
14
Copyright Act, 1911.

§1 (2)

(iii) Reproductions in the flat of—
(a) Sculpture or artistic work situate in a public place or building;
(b) Architectural works;
(iv) Reproduction of extracts in school books;
(v) Newspaper report of a lecture delivered in public.

(2) By the provisions of sect. 20 permitting a newspaper report of any political speech delivered at a public meeting;

(3) By the provisions in sect. 19 (2) relating to the right to manufacture records and perforated rolls upon payment of a royalty to the composer;

(4) By the provisions in the proviso in sect. 3 relating to the right to reproduce any work after the expiration of twenty-five (or thirty) years after the author's death.

(5) By the provisions of sect. 4 relating to the granting of compulsory licences by the Privy Council at any time after the death of the author.

Existing law.—Under the legislation now in force the author's exclusive right in a book is limited to the right of multiplying copies. So long as a copy of the book is not made, the literary production may be utilised in other material forms. A perforated roll for the pianola[1], a gramophone or phonograph record[2], a cinematograph film, are not infringements of the copyright in a book or sheet of music.

Copyright in a book may be infringed by reproduction otherwise than in print. Copies produced by writing[3], lithography[4], typewriting[5] or photography[6],are copies within the meaning of the Copyright Act, 1842.

Copyright in engravings, paintings, drawings and photographs may be infringed by any reproduction of the artistic design in the flat although not in the same form of art. Copyright in an

  1. Boosey v. Whight, [1900] 1 Ch. 122; Mabe v. Connor, [1909] 1 K. B. 515.
  2. Monckton v. The Gramophone Co. (1910), Cop. Cas. 1905–10, p. 304; The Times, December 6; Newmark v. National Phonograph Co. (1907), 23 T. L. R. 439.
  3. White v. Geroch (1819), 2 B. & Aid. 298; Lindley, M. R., in Boosey v. Whight, [1900] 1 Ch. 122, 123.
  4. Novello v. Sudlow (1852), 12 C. B. 177.
  5. Warne v. Seebohm (1888), 39 Ch. D. 73.
  6. Lindley, M.R., in Boosey v. Whiqht, [1900] 1 Ch. 122. 123.