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.
506
THE LAW OF MOTION PICTURES
It is not necessary that a sale be consummated to constitute publication. Where the work is exposed to the general public 31 “so that all may have access to it, no matter what limitations be put upon the use of it by the individual subscriber or lessee, it is published.” 32
Where an author publishes or consents to the publication of his work without complying with the statute, publication constitutes dedication to the public.33
v. Am. Lith. Co. (1904), 134 Fed. (C. C. A.) 321 ; Turner v. Robinson (Irish) (1860), 10 Ir. Ch. Rep. 121, and Prince Albert v. Strange (Eng.) (1849), 1 Mac. and G. 23.
See in this connection: Grossman v. Canada Cycle Co. (Can.) (1902), 5 Ont. L. R. 55. The mailing and even delivery of a large number of copies of an American newspaper in England to subscribers thereof was held not to be a publication since the work was not made available to the general public. See also: Francis Day & Hunter v. Feldman & Co. (Eng.) (1914), 2 Ch. 728; 83 L. J. Ch. 906; 111 L. T. 521.
31 Bleistein v. Donaldson (1903), 188 U. S. 239; 23 Sup. Ct. 298; rev. 104 Fed. (C. C. A.) 993. “There was no publication until they were exposed to the general public, so that the public, without discrimination as to persons,
might enjoy them.” (Argument of counsel.)
32 Jewelers Mercantile Agency v. Jewelers (1898), 155 N. Y. 241; 49 N. E. 872.
33 Wheaton v. Peters (1834),
8 Pet. 591; Bartlette v. Crittenden (1847), 4 McLean, 300; Same v. Same (1849), 5 McLean, 32; Boucicault v. Fox (1862), 5 Blatch. (C. C.) 87 ; Parton v. Prang (1872), 3 Cliff. (C. C.) 537; Boucicault v. Hart (1875), 13 Blatch. (C. C.) 47; Clemens v. Belford (1883), 14 Fed. (C. C.) 728; Potter v. McPherson (1880), 21 Hun (N. Y.), 559; Oertel v. Jacoby (1872), 44 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 179; Wagner v. Conried
(1903), 125 Fed. (C. C.) 798; State v. State Journal Co. (1905), 106 N. W. (Nebr.) 434.
Wall v. Gordon (1872), 12 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) N. Y. 349. Plaintiff, composer and owner of the copyright in a song “When