COPYRIGHT, an author's exclusive right of property in any work which lie writes, and which, under certain limitations, is transferable to his heirs and assigns. Such is the chief or general meaning of the term, which now, however, embraces several vari eties of right; and these, from the importance of the subject, we propose to consider separately.
idea of a right of property in literary composition is of modern origin. Nothing is heard of C. previous to the invention of printing, nor for a long time after wards. In ancient and medimval times, books appear to have been transcribed freely by other parties than their authors, and as freely disposed of, often at great prices. After the introduction of printing, the liberty to publish books became the subject of licenses and patents; and these privileges may be said to have constituted a special monopoly of the nature of copyright. In the absence of any license or protection of this kind, authors could only resort to the common law to vindicate their real or fancied rights. But the common law of England was silent on the subject. There were serious differences of opinion among lawyers as to the availableness of an exclusive right in literary composition, viewing it as a chattel or thing that could be held, inherited, or assigned. Row, it was asked, could ideas, or the way of writing a narrative, be made property? Supposing, however, that a certain structure of ideas 'and written words could be invested with the quality of property, it was reasonable to conclude that the property should be absolute and perpetual to the owner, his heirs and successors. Such being the case, it would be proper for the heirs of Shakespeare, Milton, Bunyan, and other literary luminaries of past times, to claim possession of the works of their respect ive ancestors; leaving them, of course, the right eithar to maintain a monopoly, or to suppress the works altogether. Such were the questions that puzzled the EnJish jurists of the early part of the 18th century. A compromise appears to have been made. No decision was come to as to whether literary composition was property in the ordi nary sense of the word. Yet, looking at it as a thing on which thought and labor had been expended, and professedly "for the encouragement of learning," it was deemed worthy of legal protection for at least a period limited by considerations of public policy. An act. of parliament was according passed on the subject in 1709.* This, the first C. act, S Anne, e. 19, sets on as follows: " Whereas printers, book sellers, and other persons have of late frequently taken the liberty of printing, reprint ing, and publishing, or causing to he printed, reprinted, and published, books and other writings, without the consent of the authors or proprietors of such books and writings, to their very great detriment, and too often to the ruin of them and their families: for preventing, therefore, such practices for the future, and for the encouragement of learned men to compose and write useful books, may it," etc. The chief provisions of the act were, (1.) That authors who, after April 10, 1710, had not sold their C. of works in print, were to have the sole right of printing them for 21 years; (2.) Authors of books not printed and published, and their assignee or assigns, to have the sole liberty of printing and reprinting such hook and books for the term of 14 years, to commence from the day of the first publishing the same; (3.) After the expiration of the said term
of 14 years, the sole right of printing or disposing of copies to return to the authors, if they were then living, for another term of 14 years.
Under this act, authors disposed of the C. of their works for the specified period, at the end of which, 2S years at most, the C. lapsed. Although the works might then have been considered public property, a custom arose among publishers of not interfering with each other's lapsed copyrights; and in a sense each assumed a kind of perpetual monopoly of the works which he had purchased for a terminable period. So stood matters, when Alexander Donaldson, an Edinburgh book-seller, of whom sonic notice has been taken in the article BOOK-TRADE, broke through the conventional regulations, by issuing cheap reprints of works out of copyright. There ensued a of which it is necessary to present some details. At divers times in 1729, sold the C. of his Seasons and other poems to Andrew Millar, a London book-seller, for sums amounting to £242 10.±. Thomson (lied in 174S. According to the act S Anne, c. 19, the utmost length to which time C. of these works could be extended was 28 years, which terminated in 1757. Millar died in 1768, and his executors, in 1769, sold by auc tion the C. of the works in question for £505. The purchasers were " Beckett and others." This sale was, in reality, an imposition; for, as just mentioned, the C. had expired in 1757. Aware of this fact, Donaldson, in 1768, issued a cheap edition of Thomson's Seasons. He was now challenged for an invasion of C.; and in 1771, Beckett and others applied for, and procured, an injunction from the court of chancery to restrain him from further printing and selling time work, and to make him answerable for the profits he had already realized. The only explanation of this extraordinary proceeding is, that the applicants for the injunction imagined that at common law they had acquired a property m Thomson's &ueons in all time coming. The question at issue was nothing less than the creation of perpetual monopolies in literature—not for the benefit of authors and their families, but for certain publishers and their assigns. The notion of a common-law right had prevailed in granting the injunction, and the validity of such a notion was now forever to be determined. Donaldson appealed to the house of lords. The chief points pressed for consideration were, whether at com mon law an author had the sole right of printing his works, and whether, possessing a right of that kind, it was taken away by the statute S Anne, c. 19. The lords differed in their opinion, but the decision finally come to was, that any right at common law was impeached and taken away by the statute: and the decree of the court of chancery was accordingly reversed. See Brown's Parliamentary Cases, vol. ii. p. 136. By this famed decision, it was settled that claims of C. rest altogether on the statute and its interpretations. Ever since, any one is at liberty to print and sell works of which time statutory term of C. has expired; on the simple ground, that all such works are public property.