COPYRIGHT BILL. (Hansard, 24 April 1899)

*LORD MONKSWELL

My Lords, before I address the House as to the scope and objects of this Measure I should like to say one word as to the circumstances under which the present Bill comes before your Lordships' House. Your Lordships are aware that numerous attempts have been made to deal in a comprehensive way with the Copyright Law, but none of them have been successful. In 1896 the Society of Authors, having waited 20 years, thought it would be better to attempt a reform of those laws on a more modest scale, and in 1897 they commissioned me to introduce a Bill dealing with the less contentious points and the most pressing reforms. That Bill was read a second time, referred to a Select Committee, and eventually passed by your Lordships, but too late to be considered in the House of Commons. Last year I reintroduced that Bill word for word, but the noble Earl who represents the Board of Trade then objected to it because it was not of a comprehensive character. He objected to any piecemeal dealing with the Law of Copyright. Everybody would rather have a comprehensive Measure than a piecemeal Measure, if only we could get it passed. As far as I am concerned, I did what I could to get a comprehensive reform by a Measure introduced in 1891, which was stopped by the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack because it was too big. In 1898 my Bill was stopped because it was not big enough. I take that as an indication that Her Majesty's Government are now willing that a comprehensive Measure on the Law of Copyright should be brought before your Lordships' House. Her Majesty's Government having taken that new departure, Lord Herschell, whose death is a most grievous loss to the cause of copyright reform, brought in a large consolidating and amending Measure dealing with literature and artistic copyright. That Bill was referred, together with my own Bill, to a Select Committee of your Lordships' House. That Committee held nay sittings, and examined a great many witnesses, but 360 at the end of the Session the evidence was not quite complete, and it was suggested that the Committee should be reappointed this Session. Lord Thring, however, has kindly drafted a Bill dealing only with literary copyright, leaving artistic copyright to be dealt with by a separate Bill. This is the Bill which I ask the House to read a second time, and refer to a Select Committee. I will explain some of the principal changes proposed in the Bill. The term of copyright is to be the life of the author and 30 years after his death, instead of the present term of the life of the author and seven years or 42 years, whichever should be longer. This life and 30 years is in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee and also the law that obtains in Germany at present. The Bill further makes clear that the translation, abridgement, and conversion of novels into plays constitute an infringement of copyright. Then the law as to ownership of articles in magazines and reviews is altered so as to give authors the copyright after two years from the date of the publication of the article, and also to give authors a concurrent right with owners of reviews to sue for infringement of copyright. The Bill further proposes to make the enforcement of performing rights in dramatic and musical works simpler and more efficient, and to clearly lay down the law in regard to copyright in lectures. With regard to the subject of registration the Bill deals with that in a very simple fashion; it leaves, it out altogether. I will read one paragraph on that subject from the Memorandum which Lord Thring has prepared for the use of the Committee— I have omitted the clauses relating to registration. Compulsory registration seems to me impossible. One of the great music sellers informed me that he had 20,000 copyrights, and it is obvious that many books, especially sheets of music, which are included under the definition of a book, are of so little value as to make registration of the copyright out of the question. Voluntary registration is useful only for the purpose of giving a prima, facie title to the owner of the copyright, and that object is better attained by a procedure clause making it necessary for the defendant in a copyright suit, if he disputes the title of the plaintiff, to state the name of the person whom he thinks should be substituted. 361 The greatest novelty in the Bill is a provision which gives newspapers copyright in news for 12 hours after publication. This is a law already in some of our Colonies. The law as to International Copyright is also brought more in accord with the provisions of the Convention of Berne. Authors have waited long and patiently for copyright reform, and I hope your Lordships will give a favourable reception to this Bill.