§ Where proceedings are taken in respect of the infringement of the copyright in any work and the defendant in his defence alleges that he was not aware of the existence of the copyright in the work, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to any remedy other than an injunction or interdict in respect of the infringement if the defendant proves that at the date of the infringement he was not aware and had not reasonable means of making himself aware that copyright subsisted in the work.
§ Mr. BOOTHI beg to move to leave out the words "and had not reasonable means of making himself aware." I admit that the Bill has been vastly improved in this particular. These words are part of the original framework of the Bill, which 2144 partook too much of the idea that a man must prove his innocence. The bulk of that has been taken out, and that is one of the reasons why I feel myself in a less antagonistic position. But there is still this phrase remaining, and it is one that is calculated to lead to litigation. It is one of those things which every man will interpret in a different way, and I do not think its inclusion will prove of any value to anyone except the lawyers.
§ Mr. J. WARDI beg to Second the Amendment.
§ Sir J. SIMONI recognise the reasonableness of the hon. Gentleman, and I hope that when I have offered a few words of explanation he will withdraw his Amendment. There are two reasons for leaving the Clause as it stands. In the first place this Bill already makes a very great and beneficent change in the interests of the innocent infringer. If the Bill becomes law it will relieve the innocent infringer from liability for damages and to an injunction; and it does not expose him to liability to the penalties for deliberate wickedness. It appears to me it would be a most unfortunate thing if we were to lay it down that a man who says he is an innocent infringer should be entitled to be treated as such so long as he shows he was not aware that the copyright existed. That would be exposing the really honest person to the full severity of the law while it would provide a loophole for the man who was sufficiently shifty to take care not to inquire if the thing was copyright. If we are going to relieve the innocent, it is our duty to see that it is pure and unspotted innocence that will have the benefit.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.