Exhibitors Herald (Jul-Sep 1922)

54 EXHIBITORS HERALD July 22, 1922 Al Lichtman Will Distribute This B. P. Schulberg Special Rich Men's Wives Mildred June Claire Windsor Another scene from the Schulberg special {Continued from page 47) from the obligation, in law and equity, of paying for the product which he uses. Fifth, it is not infrequently alleged that the Society is an unlawful combination, that it operates in violation of the anti-trust laws, and that therefore, being an unlawful body, it is without right to demand payment of fees or anything else; that it can have no rights at law. Again and again this question has been dismissed by the courts. There is no question of the legality of the Society's existence and purpose. It means nothing whatever, but even if it did, the exhibitor should realize that he would have no right to use the property, to appropriate the assets of a concern which did violate the anti-trust acts, without paying that concern for such property or assets. Sixth, now artd then someone fluently "damns" the publishers, claiming that they are unfair in collecting license fees for the public performance of works which they are "plugging," advertising and trying to "make," when the exhibitor, by playing them in his theatre helps to "make" them. It should be understood that the publisher is powerless to waive performing rights license fees. Tnis proposition concerns not alone the publisher, it concerns the composer and author, and even were the publisher willing to waive his rights, the composer and author would be unwilling so to do. The rights are vested in composer, authors and publishers, to encourage the development of music and culture in cur country. * * * Seventh, charges are made that the funds of the Society are not used for the benefit of its members. This is beside the question and the charge is based upon ignorance of the facts. The funds of the Society are 100 per cent divided between its members, quarterly dividends are declared, at which all of the revenue less expenses of operation, is divided between composers, authors and publishers. I don't understand the opposition of the exhibitor in this matter, except it be explainable on the grounds that he is misinformed, or misled. Time after time the exhibitor has been assured that some movement was on foot that would relieve him of this "burden." Out of all of the talk, much of it just "hot air" and "bunk," there has been but one practical suggestion. That one was that the law be changed. And after a considerable effort the exhibitors' organization persuaded a congressman to introduce a bill amending the copyright act, which bill is now in committee at Washington. I don't think there !s anything that the exhibitors could do, that they haven't done, to have the bill favorably considered. But, there hasn't even been a hearing on it yet. I doubt, frankly, if there ever will be, for I don't believe the leaders of the exhibitors want a hearing; I never did believe that they wanted one, and I am convinced that if it is ever held they will be sincerely sorry, as opposed to a wise and constructive law, in the interest of the development of music and culture in this country, they can only propose a purely selfish, cold-blooded commercial reason for wanting a law repealed that has contributed in the past very materially to their welfare and profit. However, when that issue comes it will be met by the society. * * * Let us very briefly examine into the merits of the position taken by the composers, authors and publishers. These men spend their lives originating musical compositions, developing and exploiting them. In return they receive revenue from three sources, the sales of sheet music, the royalties from mechanical reproduction, and the fees from public performance. On the average they make a very ordi nary living; not comparable with the profits of the average exhibitor. What do they contribute to your welfare and profit? What does their music, the creations of their effort, mean to the motion picture theatre and the exhibitor? Perhaps the best answer to these questions is that no motion picture theatre has ever been able to exist without using music, new music, popular music, much music and more and more music. In conclusion I want to repeat remarks made in other articles — that I think you gentlemen, the rank and file of exhibitors, are foolish to "kid" yourselves along any more, or permit your leaders or lawyers to do it. The principle of charging performing rights license fees is a fair and just one; it is justified by the law, the law has been interpreted again and again by the courts, and there is no way out except through amending the law. Popularity of Wilde in Evidence at Showing of Film Adapted From Plaj An unusual type of audience, it i: stated, turned out at the Strand theatre New York, for the initial show of "f Woman of No Importance," Select pic ture, adapted from Oscar Wilde's fa mous play. The English author is de clared to have a wide following in thi country which includes all classes c people. A number of men and women in foi mal dress were in evidence at Stran performances and long lines of limousine stretched along Broadway in the immed ate vicinity of the theatre. Theati parties were given by students of liter; ture at many schools and colleges as we as societies and women's clubs, — ind cative of Wilde's popularity.