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.
WHERE MATERIAL WRITTEN BY MORE THAN ONE PERSON 37
In case of collaboration, where there is no express agreement to the contrary, the authors become tenants in common of the work.47
A tenant in common of literary property may grant a license to reproduce the common work in motion pictures without securing the consent of his co-tenant.48 He can
years had been engaged in compiling a work and had called in a student to help him tabulate the same, the literary product was held in that case to belong wholly to the professor in the absence of an agreement between them, although the student had placed considerable labor upon the work. Shepherd v. Conquest (Eng.) (1856), 17 C. B. 427; 25 L. J. C. P. 127; 4 W. R. 283; 2 Jur. (N. S.) 236; Levy v. Rutley (Eng.) (1871), 40 L. J. C. P. 244; L. R. C. C. P. 523; 24 L. T. 621; 19 W. R. 976.
47 On this proposition see : Carter v. Bailey (1874), 64 Me. 458; Trade Auxiliary Co. v. Middlesborough T. P. Ass’n (Eng.) (1888), 58 L. J. Ch. 293; 40 Ch. D. 425; 60 L. T. 681; 37 W. R. 337. Three proprietors of three periodicals employed one to make certain compilations for them.
Held that each proprietor of each periodical had an equal interest in the copyright. See also :
Powell v. Head (Eng.) (1879), 12 Ch. D. 686, where it was held that registered owners of a copyright took as tenants in common.
Barclay v. Barclay (1915), 155 N. Y. Supp. 221; aff’d 162 A. D. (N. Y.) 557; 156 N. Y. Supp. 1 1 14. See this case for a valuable discussion of rights of tenants in common of copyrights, trademarks, etc., where they are made use of in a going business.
On the question whether the collaborators are co-partners or joint venturers, Pitts v. Hall (1854), 3 Blatchf. 201; also discussion and cases cited in Section 10.
49 Nillson v. Lawrence (1912), 148 (N. Y.) A. D. 678; 133 N. Y. Supp. 293: “It is settled that with regard to property of this nature (a play), one tenant in common has as good a right to use it, or to license third persons to use it as has the other tenant in common, and neither can come into a court of equity and assert a superior right unless it has been