Arguments before the Committee on Patents of the House of Representatives Part 22

Mr. PUTNAM. I think perhaps the publishers ought to answer that. It is a specification on which they alleged to the conferences might be inconvenient and difficult in some cases. In the case of directories, the directory publishers said that they were in the habit of having their work done at a great many establishments. Of our general legal advisers, as you have asked me, I feel that I ought to state this: The chairman of the advisory committee of the American Bar a.s.sociation is not here to state it himself, as he stated it to us: but he was of the opinion that it was not relevant to the affidavit. But I do not see that at this point, sir, this question can be discussed, because the persons who are opposed to this provision are not fully represented here.

Of those on the list of partic.i.p.ants that cared to be heard at this point I know of no others, except that Mr. Sullivan, who represents the International Typographical Union, not caring to make any argument or statement, but possibly caring to do so later, if he may, would like to say just a word in behalf of the general principles of the bill, or on behalf of the bill as a whole--the feeling of the Typographical Union as to the bill.

STATEMENT OF J. J. SULLIVAN, ESQ., REPRESENTING THE INTERNATIONAL TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION.

Mr. SULLIVAN. Senators and Representatives, I do not desire to take up any of your time just at this hour, as there are many gentlemen here from out of town who wish to be heard before the committee. I therefore desire to be heard at some future time, as I understand you will have a session of this committee to-morrow; and on behalf of the organization, the International Typographical Union, which I have the honor to represent, I particularly protest against any modification of section 13, known as the manufacturing clause of the copyright law.

Mr. CHANEY. Is that in this bill or the present law?

Mr. CURRIER. This bill.

Mr. SULLIVAN. I refer to section 13, known as the manufacturing clause of the old act and copied in the new one. Speaking also on behalf of my a.s.sociates from New York, representing 7,500 typographers, we protest against any modification of this law.

Mr. PUTNAM. You must make it clear whether you refer to this bill or to the existing law. Are you satisfied with the bill?

Mr. SULLIVAN. I refer to the revised bill.

Mr. PUTNAM. You are satisfied with the bill as it stands?

Mr. SULLIVAN. The Senate bill.

Mr. CURRIER. You are referring simply to section 13?

Mr. SULLIVAN. Section 13; yes. That is, the old section.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you approve in all respects the bill as introduced in the Senate and House?

Mr. SULLIVAN. No, Senator; I respectfully beg to differ in this respect--that either through inadvertence or slight mistake in the draft of the bill that has been submitted to the Representatives taking part in these conferences there are six lines bracketed.

Mr. PUTNAM. They are not bracketed in the official bill. They were left out of the bill as introduced.

Mr. SULLIVAN. I respectfully request that section 13 of the bill as presented to the Representatives taking part in the conferences here be revised in the Senate bill so as to include the paragraph that is bracketed in the draft of the bill sent out to the delegates.

Mr. PUTNAM. Well, Mr. Sullivan, I want you to be clear about this. The bill as introduced into Congress did not contain those brackets. That was a draft sent out some time ago, and the bill as introduced in Congress has not those brackets.

Mr. SULLIVAN. (after examining the official copy of the bill). That is on page 9; that is all right.

Mr. CURRIER. It is right as it is, as we understand?

Mr. SULLIVAN. It is right as it is. That is all right, then; we have no objection, Senator, to the bill as it stands. I only wish to say at this time that that bill has already pa.s.sed the lower branch of Congress.

Mr. CURRIER. You refer to section 13?

Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes, sir; and Representative Currier knows it has also pa.s.sed his committee. We respectfully submit the resolution to your hands, and I desire to be heard on it to-morrow.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, with your permission Mr. G. Howlett Davis, of New York, desires to be heard as representing inventors who have allied themselves particularly to these devices for the reproduction of music to the ear. Mr. Davis's suggestion was that as the composers had been heard as the creators of the music in the first instance, one who is engaged as an inventor in the production of these devices should first be heard on the other side.

Mr. S. T. CAMERON. May it please the committee, Mr. Chairman, I am one of those who are representing the interests of the talking machines of the country.

The CHAIRMAN. Whom do you represent?

Mr. CAMERON. I represent the American Graphophone Company of New York.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you desire to be heard by the committee?

Mr. CAMERON. Yes, sir. I wish to say at this point, however, sir, that with all due respect to the Librarian, it would seem to me that there is no good reason existing why he should depart from the mode of procedure in connection with these talking machines that has been taken in all the rest of the bill--that is, that those who are the proponents for the changes in this bill that are of a very radical nature and very radically different from existing law should present to the committee their reasons for such changes, before hearing from the opponents of the bill.

Mr. PUTNAM. I had no intention, Mr. Chairman, of departing from that mode of procedure. I understood that two gentlemen in behalf of these provisions had been heard, Mr. Sousa and Mr. Herbert; and I had also been informed that the other interests, including those of the publishers, did not care to be heard at this point; they were content to have the provision before you as the affirmative. I desire now that the opponents of the bill should have the fullest opportunity, at the earliest possible moment, to present their views to the committee. The opponents have not advised me as to whether they had agreed upon any method of presenting their case. I simply had this suggestion from Mr.

Davis which I laid before you, and the fact that Mr. O'Connell, representing ten manufacturers of automatic piano players, also wishes to be heard.

Mr. PAUL H. CROMELIN. Mr. Chairman, as the representative of the Columbia Phonograph Company, I should like to know whether it is the purpose of this committee to sit to-morrow. I had promised certain gentlemen in New York City to telephone them between half after 12 to-day and 1 o'clock, so that they can leave on the Congressional Limited and be here to-morrow, if it is your intention to-morrow to hear the opponents of this bill.

The CHAIRMAN (after consultation with other members of the committee).

We will meet to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock.

Mr. CROMELIN. And may I ask also, Mr. Chairman, if it is your intention to continue these proceedings this afternoon?

The CHAIRMAN. We will continue this session until about half past 1.

Mr. CROMELIN. Thank you very much.

Mr. ALBERT H. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I wish to inquire whether the committee is willing to sit also on Sat.u.r.day to continue the hearings?

The CHAIRMAN (after further consultation). It is the purpose of the committee, if possible, to finish its hearings to-morrow.

Mr. WALKER. I wish to suggest to the committee that this bill is incomparably the most important measure that has been before any Committee on Patents of either House of the American Congress at any time since the civil war, and I think it is the most important measure that ever was before any Committee on Patents of the American Congress since the enactment of the patent law in 1836.

The CHAIRMAN. It is not the purpose of the committee to deprive anyone who desires a hearing of that privilege. On the contrary, the committee will sit so long as anyone desires to be heard, within any sort of reason.

Mr. WALKER. If the Senator will permit me one moment, I am prepared and have been preparing myself through a rather long lifetime to elucidate the subject of copyright law; and I appear before the committee in the interests of the American people and also in the interests of the authors.

The CHAIRMAN. How much time do you wish, Mr. Walker?

Mr. WALKER. I wish at least two hours, and I can take it at any time at the convenience of the committee, at any day.

The CHAIRMAN (after further consultation with the other members of the committee). We will hear you, Mr. Walker, one hour to-morrow morning, if we are unable to reach you to-day, with the privilege of submitting in writing your views if you so desire.

Mr. WALKER. If the chairman will allow me to make the suggestion, if I were to be heard to-morrow for an hour, that would probably cut off other gentlemen who would wish to speak much shorter than that, and it would be very convenient for me, if the committee is to sit at all on Sat.u.r.day, to hear other gentlemen on Friday and let me speak on Sat.u.r.day.

The CHAIRMAN. If we are compelled to hold a session on Sat.u.r.day, we will hear you on that day; but we hope that the gentlemen who are present to present their views to the committee will finish in such time as will permit you to have your hour to-morrow morning.

Mr. WALKER. Then, is it understood that I am to speak first to-morrow morning?

The CHAIRMAN. I think not.

Mr. CURRIER. There are some other gentlemen here who will want five or ten minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Inasmuch as you prefer to go over until Sat.u.r.day, if convenient to the committee, I should think that the members from out of town and the other gentlemen here should be first to address the committee.