The possible amendment of the copyright laws is a subject which my time
does not permit me to consider in detail, even were that deemed
desirable. The law now in force consists of the Act of July 8, 1870, as
edited to become title 60, chapter 3 of the Revised Statutes, and ten
amendatory acts passed subsequently. Naturally there is lacking the
consistency and homogeneousness of a single well-considered copyright
statute. It is possible that Congress will presently be willing to take
under consideration, if not the re-codification of the copyright laws,
then, at least, some amendment of them. An increase in the period of
protection has frequently been urged, with some advocacy of perpetual
copyright. As the Federal constitution, however, distinctly provides
that the protection granted the writings of an author is to be for a
_limited time_, an amendment of the constitution would be necessary
before Congress could enact perpetual copyright, and such alteration of
the fundamental law of the land is not probable.
Much might be said for an increase in the period of protection. It is
for a shorter term of years than that provided by most modern copyright
legislation, and the trend of such lawmaking has been in the direction
of an increase in the length of time during which the author or his
heirs could control the reproduction of his work. It should be borne in
mind that for books of little value the length of the term of protection
is of no great consequence. "Dead" books are not affected by the length
of the term of copyright. In the case also of popular new books, the
great sales and consequent disproportionate remuneration comes within a
short period of time after publication, and are not likely to continue
during a long term of copyright. On the other hand, many books of great
and permanent value not unfrequently make their way slowly into popular
favor, and are not fully appreciated until many years after publication.
For such books--the results, perhaps, of long years of study and
labor--an equitable return cannot be secured except by a long term of
protection.
Perhaps the most urgently desirable forward step in respect to copyright
is the adhesion of the United States to the Berne convention, thus
securing the inclusion in the International Copyright Union of our
country, the leading one of the three great states not yet members of
this admirable association of nations. Were the United States a member
of the Berne Union a compliance with the statutory provisions of our own
laws alone would secure copyright protection not only within the limits
of the United States, but practically throughout the whole book-reading
world--Great Britain, all Europe (except temporarily Russia, Austria,
and Scandinavia), Canada and Australia, India, Japan and South
Africa--thus increasing the possible reading public of American authors
many fold. It would seem that considerations of justice to our large and
constantly increasing national contingent of literary and artistic
producers requires this advance of such great practical importance. It
is the easier of accomplishment because it involves the adoption of no
new principle, but only the extension of the principle embodied in the
Act of March 3, 1891, namely, reciprocal international exchange of
copyright privileges, and in return for the advantages which would
accrue to our own citizens, only obligates the extension of copyright in
the United States to the subjects of such countries as are members of
the Union. Of the members of the International Copyright Union, all the
great nations already enjoy copyright in the United States, and it would
only remain to extend this privilege to the citizen authors of the six
minor states that are members of the Union, namely, Hayti, Japan,
Luxembourg, Monaco, Norway and Tunis.