The law of motion pictures (1918)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

22 THE LAW OF MOTION PICTURES Hence in the usual transaction between a scenario writer and a film producer where the scenario is purchased for a lump sum of money, the author of the scenario divests himself of all rights in and to the same and the film producer acquires the sole right not only to make a motion picture reproduction of the scenario, but also to make any and all of the above mentioned versions of the same. Here, as in the case of a novel or drama, the author may limit the grant by express reservations in the contract of sale. Where there is no contract of sale, but a sale, that is, where the manuscript and money are simultaneously exchanged, the producer acquires all rights in the scenario.-9 remedies accorded to other property.” It follows “the person of the owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile.” 29 Dam v. Kirk La Shelle (1910) , 175 Fed. (C. C. A.) 901: “Now, as a matter of law, it seems possible to draw only one conclusion from the facts surrounding the acquisition of the story by the Ess Ess Publishing Company, and that is that it became the purchaser, and consequently, the proprietor of the work, with all the rights accompanying ownership. The author offered the story. The publisher accepted and paid for it, and the author transferred it without any reservations whatever. “While it is probable that an author in assigning the right to publish and vend his work may retain and reserve the rights of translation or dramatization ( Ford v. Blaney Amusement Co. (1906), 148 Fed. (C. C.) 642, a sale or assignment without reservations would seem necessarily to carry all the rights incidental to ownership. And a transaction in which an author delivers his manuscript and accepts a sum of money ‘in full payment for story’ cannot he regarded as a sale with reservations. The courts cannot read words of limitation into a transfer which the parties do not choose to use.” See also: Lacy v. Toole (Eng.) (1867) , 15 L. T. N. S. 512, wherein it was held that a letter written by the owner of a copyright in a