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.
326
11
vested. This has been the consistent view of the Copyright Office. 2° Nevertheless, in Fred Fisher Music Publishing Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons.^^ the Supreme Court, openly rewriting the Copyright Act,'^'^ held that an assignment of the renewal term, made by the author dxiring the original term was binding. In Miller Music Corp. V. Charles N. Daniels. Inc..^^ the Court tempered the Fred Fisher holding slightly, by holding that where the author died before the renewal term the assignment of the renewal term, as a contingent interest, failed and the author's statutory successors took the renewal term free and clear of all assignments made during the original term.
The 1976 Act
Efforts at revising the 1909 Act began in 1955 with a comprehensive way with a series of 36 issue studies by the Copyright Office. In 1961, Register of Copyrights Abraham Kaminstein issued a report to Congress containing the Office's preliminary conclusions and recommendations about what a revised law should contain.^* The Register recommended that for works created after the new law went into effect, the copyright should last for an initial term of 28 years from the first public dissemination of the work,^^ and that at any time during the last 5 years of this initial term, any person claiming an interest in the copyright could file a renewal application, which would then
^° See COPYRIGHT LAW REVISION: REPORT OF THE REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS ON THE GENERAL REVISION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 53 (House Comm. Print 1961).
21
318 U.S. 643 (1943)
^^ See 318 U.S. at 647, "if we look only to what the Act says, there can be no doubt as to the answer," the answer being the opposite of what the Court held.
23 362 U.S. 373 (1960). In Stewart v. Abend. 495 U.S. 207 (1990) , the Court applied Miller Music to cases involving derivative works prepared during the original term, overruling Rohauer v. Killiam Shows, Inc., 551 F.2d 484 (2d Cir.), cert. denied. 431 U.S. 949 (1977).
2* This report was published by the House Judiciary Committee, Copyright Law Revision; Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law. 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (House Comm. Print 1961) .
2^ This differed from the 1909 Act, which measured term from the date of first publication.