COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 19 July 1897)

*LORD MONKSWELL

asked to be allowed to say a few words as to the proceedings of the Select Committee to. which the Bill was referred. The Benches opposite were represented by Lord Knutsford, Lord Pirbright, Lord Hatherton, and Lord Tennyson; Lord Hobhouse, Lord Farmer, Lord Turing, and Lord Welby represented that side. The Committee sat several clays, examined several witnesses and went into the subject carefully. The first point which they devoted a great deal of attention to was that of translation. It was absolutely necessary to amend the law with regard to translation. It was now in a sad state of confusion. Translations into foreign tongues were dealt with under the Berne Convention and under 388 the International Copyright Act. But as to translations into Hindustani, Welsh, Gaelic, and other tongues current within the British dominions the law was in a doubtful state indeed. With regard to this, he could not do better than quote from the evidence of Mr. Daldy, one of the Commissioners of 1878, and who was now, and had been for many years, honorary secretary of the Copyright Association,— Lord Thring—In answer to the chairman you said, as I understand, that there was a difficulty about the law of translation in England as compared with a book translated in France?—The difficulty arises from the confusion of the law. The Chairman.—A doubt as to the law?—Yes. Lord Thring.—Would you explain that a little?—With pleasure. Under the A ct of 1842 there is no protection whatever for translations in England. Under the Berne Convention we are to have protection for translations of English works if they are published in other countries, but we have nothing giving protection for translations published within the British dominions, and such a case has occurred. Lord Thring then asked, "Will you put a concrete case?" The answer was:— A concrete case occurred some years ago in India. Your Lordships probably are acquainted with the name of 'Todhunter's Arithmetic.' That was translated into an Indian language, and published there and went through some 20 editions. The publishers, on behalf of the proprietors, tried to stop it. but they found by the decision of the Judge, which was a righteous decision according to the law, that they could not stop it. They could have stopped it if it had been published in Italy or France or Germany, but not when it was published within our own dominions. It was perfectly certain, therefore, that the matter of translation ought to be dealt with as soon as possible, and the promoters of the Bill proposed to deal with it by as was proposed in the original Bill, the absolute right during the whole period of the copyright to prevent unauthorised translations. An endeavour had been made to lighten the Bill so that it might be got through their Lordships' House this Session, and it dealt only with those subjects which were most pressing and least contentious. All reference to newspaper copyright had been struck out. With regard to magazine copyright, it was proposed to make it retrospective, but as there was a difference of opinion as to that, the 389 clause in the Bill making the copyright retrospective had been omitted. With regard to lectures the Bill had also been considerably lightened. The great point on which. The Committee wished to insist was that copyright should be given not only in lectures when published in a Look, but when delivered, and that they hail tried to effect by the Bill. It was further suggested in the original Bill that the law should be altered so as to give copyright, which did not now exist, to lectures delivered in endowed buildings. The Select Committee were on the whole favourable to that proposition, but at the same time they recognised that any alteration of the law to effect that must seriously affect very considerable interests, and they thought it was not desirable, without taking a great deal of evidence mid going into the matter very thoroughly, to recommend such an alteration in the law, consequently they had inserted in the amended Bill a proviso setting up again the provision that now existed, not allowing copyright to lectures in endowed buildings. For the present it had been decided not to propose any change in the law with regard to the difficult and thorny question of registration. Another alteration had been made which he thought would commend itself to their Lordships. The principal Act of 1842 now applied to all British possessions unless by Order in Council they should be exempted either from the whole Act or part of it. It was proposed in the amended Bill to give the British possessions much greater freedom of action by declaring that the Act, if it passed, should not run in any of the British possessions unless they themselves asked either for the whole or part of it. The net result, therefore, of the labours of the Select Committee had been to greatly lighten the Bill and to clear it of almost every subject of controversy, whilst at the same time it introduced a great many alterations of the law which were of considerable value. He might perhaps be allowed to say that the best thanks of the Committee were due to Lord Thring for the great care and attention he had bestowed on the drafting of this Measure. ["Hear!"] He found that two or three Amendments would have to be made, which, however, did not touch the substance of the Bill. In order that noble 390 Lords might. have an opportunity of considering the Amendments he had put down, he proposed to take the Report stage to-morrow, and the Amendments on Thursday or Friday, when he hoped the House would give a Third Reading to, the Bill. ["Hear, hear!"] He begged to move that the House now resolve itself into Committee on the Bill.

Considered in Committee (according to Order). The Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; Standing Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow.