The law of motion pictures (1918)

WHERE PICTURE IS PRODUCED IN SERIAL FORM 25 originality, ingenuity and literary effort of the adaptor will be fully protected. The same applies to translations made of foreign works in the public domain. The translator is entitled to protect his translation as against everyone. No one may use his translation, although anyone may make his own independent translation of the original work and make whatever use of his own translation and the original work he sees fit.33 Section 7. — Where the motion picture is produced in serial form. A recent development of the motion picture industry is the production of films in which the story is told in serial form, one or two reels being shown at a time. Simultaneously writh the exhibition of the film the story of the picture is published in newspapers in installments. The right to publish the story in the newspapers does not necessarily belong to the film producer. It belongs to the owner of the publication rights in the drama, novel, 33 Stevenson v. Fox (1915), 226 Fed. (D. C.) 990; Shook v. Rankin (1875), Fed. Cas. (C. C.) No. 12804; O’Neill v. General Film Co. (1915), 152 N. Y. Supp. 599; modified and aff’d in 171 A. D. (N. Y.) 854; 157 N. Y. Supp. 1028; but not modified on question of infringement. The defendant was leasing out a photo play entitled “Count of Monte Cristo.” “ It is claimed that such motion picture play was prepared from and is an appropriation of the plaintiff’s Fechter version and infringes upon plaintiff’s common law property right therein. Defendant claims that the motion picture play was produced by resort to original sources, alleged to be open to all . . . and that in so far as there is any similarity between the motion picture play and the Fechter version, it is