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.
12
THE LAW OF MOTION PICTURES
in a novel has the exclusive right to dramatize the work.14
Hence, where the publisher of a novel copyrights the work of an author, a third party purchasing the motion picture rights to such novel, without notice of the rights of the author, buys them free from any claims which the author may have as against the publisher. If the record in the copyright office shows that the publisher is the owner of record of such copyright, the purchaser is not bound to inquire what relationship exists with respect to the work between the publisher and the author.15
As a matter of fact the publisher may be holding the copyright as trustee for the author; his rights may be limited to the extent only of reproducing the novel in copies for sale. But if the copyright record does not disclose any such relationship a purchaser for value without notice buys free and clear.
If the author wishes to retain his rights it is advisable
14 Copyright Act of 1909, Section 1, subdivision (b). Photo Drama Motion Picture Co. v. Social Uplift Corp. (1915), 220 Fed. (C. C. A.) 448.
15 Brady v. Reliance Co. (1916) , 232 Fed. (D. C.) 259, Mayer, J.: “Where a publisher copyrights a work of an author there must of necessity exist some arrangement between them, and that, perchance the author may have reserved something undisclosed which the person dealing with the owner of the copyright should
have suspected, although an examination of the record title provided for by law shows good title. This, to my mind, would place a duty upon a person dealing with the owner of a copyrighted work which the law never contemplated, and which from the standpoint of commercial requirements would be unjust, and seriously hamper legitimate dealings.” See also: Photo Drama Motion Picture Co., Inc., v. Social Uplift Film Co. (1915), 220 Fed. (C. C. A.) 448.