DEVELOPMENT OF THE IDEA OF COPYRIGHT
As we have already seen, the early printers concerned themselves almost
exclusively with the reprinting of church books and the classics. These
last required for successful performance expert editorial work and proof
reading. The printers engaged competent and sometimes very distinguished
scholars to do this work for them and paid them for their labor. Out of
this practice grew the idea that the author might properly share in the
profits of the original work done by him. If he were paid for preparing
a good text of Virgil, for instance, why could he not be paid for
writing a critical article to be prefixed to the volume, and why not if
he wrote a whole book about Virgil which the publisher desired to
present to the world of scholars? At first there was some objection on
the part of the writers themselves. It was held by many that it was
undignified and improper for a writer to sell his ideas. Such opinions
soon ceased to be common. The race of professional authors living by
their pens came into existence.
The same questions which arose with regard to the printer’s right to his
work extended to the question of the author’s right. Even before the
author’s pecuniary right in his work was clearly recognized the claim
was asserted that he ought to have control of it. Luther, for example,
strongly asserted this right of control and strenuously objected to
piracy on the ground of his desire to safeguard the correctness of texts
purporting to be written by him. He does not appear to have cared for
the money, as he himself corrected the texts of pirated editions of his
works. He feared, however, that harm might come through typographical
errors or even the deliberate falsification of his writing. This has
always been a real danger, and one of the greatest complaints made by
European authors against American printers previous to the days of
international copyright was on the ground of the incorrectness of the
pirated editions.
One of the first persons to enjoy anything like copyright protection in
Germany was Albrecht Dürer. The city government of Nuremberg undertook
to protect Dürer and his family in the right to print and publish his
works. It is a curious mark of the undeveloped state of public opinion
regarding these matters at this time that Dürer seems to have been
protected more as an inventor than as an author. The early German
copyrights in many cases seem not only to have prevented others from
reprinting a specified book but also from printing any book on the same
subject. For example, Dürer wrote a book on _Proportion_ which was
published in Paris. Before it was completed another artist named Beham
undertook to publish a book on _Proportion_. Beham was ordered not to
publish his book until after Dürer had completed publication. He
insisted that his work was an absolutely independent one, not in any way
copied from or related to the work of Dürer, but his plea was
disregarded, although, as it afterward turned out, it was quite true
that his work was entirely independent.
Throughout Europe during the period we have under consideration we find
two ideas gradually clearing themselves from the confused thinking of
the time and coming into recognition. The first is the idea that the
writer of a book has for a time at least property rights in it, and the
other that old books belong to the public. That is the basis of our
modern thinking on the subject. We recognize that any writer may
copyright his work and is entitled to the control of it during the
copyright period, which varies in different countries. When his
copyright has expired any publisher who cares to undertake the venture
as a business proposition may bring out an edition and sell it at
whatever price he chooses. That is the reason why old books are
generally cheaper than new books. An edition of Scott or Dickens is
purely a manufacturing proposition. An edition of Maurice Hewlett is a
very different matter because Mr. Hewlett, or his publisher, holds
copyright on his works and must be paid for the privilege of publishing.
Another important development in thought was the growth of the idea of
right as distinguished from privilege. A privilege, as the word implies,
is an act of grace. It is a grant of permission to do a thing which one
has no inherent right to do. In England, as we shall later see, when the
idea of copyright came to be seriously considered it was based on the
common law, that is to say, it was recognized that the printer and
author had some rights in the matter.
As soon as it was seen that the printer and the author had produced
something more than a mere piece of merchandise and that the property
right of the producer inhered in that added element quite as much as in
the piece of merchandise the basis was laid for the common law treatment
of the whole matter. The extension of the conception of property to
cover thoughts as well as things was the basis of the whole matter.
It was a long time before these ideas emerged on the Continent. It was
well to the end of the 18th century before these matters were clearly
understood and recognized by law. It was not until 1777 that French law
distinctly recognized the difference between old and new books, and the
rights of the author. This was only twelve years before the French
Revolution. At that time all the old laws were swept away and the
extreme regulation of printing in France gave place to no regulation at
all, which for a time made things worse than ever. It was not until into
the nineteenth century that the question of copyright has been
reasonably settled. There is still something to be desired before ideal
conditions are reached. Copyright laws of the various nations differ
greatly, but on the whole they fairly accomplish the desired results
within the national boundaries.
International copyright rests on the Treaty of Bern in 1887. The United
States was for many years a great offender in the matter of the
recognition of the rights of foreign authors. At the time of the Treaty
of Bern the United States recognized the principle of international
copyright, but we did not have reasonably satisfactory legislation on
the subject until so recently as 1909. In this, as in other matters
which we have been discussing and shall discuss in this volume, very
little reference has been made to England for the reason that a separate
volume will be given to the history of printing in that country.