The copyright law now in force in Great Britain is in substance that of 5 and 6 Viet., e. 45, enacted in 1842, with amendment of 1862 for paintings and photographs. Exclusive right to perform dramatic pieces is given by the statute of 1833. Sculpture is provided for under the act of 1813. See COPYRIGHT.
The copyright net was the result of a Parlia mentary movement initiated by Sergeant Tal fourd, conducted later by Lord Mahon. Under Talfourd's bill of 1841 it was proposed to ex tend the term of copyright to a period of sixty years from the death of the author. The prin cipal opponent of this longer term was Macaulay, at that time a member of the House. Macaulay's views prevailed, and the Talfourd bill was de feated. The term finally arrived at was that suggested by Macaulay, and it was also at his instance that the provision was added against a possible suppression of books by the owners of the copyright.
In the United States the first act in regard to copyright was passed in Connecticut in January, 1783. This was followed by the acts of Massachu setts, Maryland, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, later in 1783, and before May, 1786, all of the other original States, except Delaware, had passed similar acts. These acts were due more particularly to the efforts of Noah Webster, and their first service was the protection of his famous Speller. Webster jour neyed from State capital to State capital to urge upon Governors and Legislatures the immediate necessity of copyright laws, and his persistent efforts were crowned with success. The neces sity for State laws on the subject was, how ever, obviated by the United States statute of 1790. Previous to the adoption, in 1787, of the Federal Constitution, a general copyright law was not within the province of the central Government, and in order to encourage the States in the framing of copyright legislation, a resolution, pro posed by :Madison, was adopted in Congress in May, 1783, recommending to the States the adop tion of laws securing copyright for a term of not less than fourteen years, with right of renewal for fourteen years more. Certain of the State acts granted longer terms. The act of 1790, how ever, provided for the double term suggested by Madison. The act of 1831 extended the fourteen years to twenty-eight, with the privilege to the author, his widow, or the children, of renewal for fourteen years more. The statute law relat
ing, to copyright is to be found in P. S. Rec. "tat., Tit. 60, .Chap. 3 (1374), with later am•nd ments, of which those of March, MI, intro duced international provisions. (See COPY RIGHT.) Under the interpretation of the United States courts, copyright in published works exists only by virtue of the statute, while in the works that have not been published, such as compositions prepared for dramatic representa tion, the copyright obtains through the common law. The United States decision which still serves as a precedent on the point of statutory limitation of copyright is that of the United States Supreme Court in 1834 in the case of Wheaton vs. Peters. This decision involved the purport of the United States law of 1790, and the determination of the same question that haul been decided by the House of Lords in 1774; viz. whether copyright in a published work existed by the common law, and if so whether it had been taken away by statute. The Court held that the law had been settled in England, the act of 8 Anne, Chap. 21, having taken away any right previously existing at common law; and that the copyright statute of 1790 did not affirm a right already in existence, but created one; and finally, that there was no common law of the linited States in force. Justices Thompson and Baldwin, in opposing the conclusions of the four justices concurring in this decision, took the ground that the common law of England did prevail in the United States, that copyright at common law had been fully recognized, and that even if it were admitted that such copyright had been abrogated in England by the statute of Anne, such statute had, of course, no effect either in the colonies or in the United States. In 1880, in the case of Putnam vs. Pol lard, it was claimed by the plaintiff that the decision in Wheaton vs. Peters could, in any case, only make a precedent for Pennsylvania ; that the English common law obtained in the State of New York, and could not have been affected by the statute of Anne; hut the New York Supreme Court decided that Wheaton vs. Peters constituted a valid precedent.