The talking machine world (Jan-Dec 1908)

THE TALKING SIACHINE WORLD. THE INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT CONFERENCE The Especial Duties Delegated to Thorvald Solberg, Register of Copyrights Defined — Memorial Signed by the Leading Talking Machine Concerns of the United States Emphasizes the Facts in Connection With Copyright Legislation — Solberg l-las no Plenipotentiary Powers and Cannot Commit the United States to Any Action Taken by the Conference. Manufacturers of talking machines and records, automatic musical instruments and player rolls are manifesting the keenest interest in the International Copyright Conference, which opened in Berlin, Germany, yesterday, October 14th. As stated in our last issue, Thorvald Solberg, register of copyrights, is the delegate from the United States, and those interested have been much concerned anent the powers imparted to him by our Government. In this connection a memorial seeking information and signed by Frank L. Dyer, president of the National Phonograph Co.; Horace Pettit, of the Victor Talking Machine Co.; E. D. Easton, president of the Columbia Phonograph Co., and John J. O'Connell, counsel for the National Piano Manufacturers' Association was addressed to the Secretary of State at Washington, D. C. It read as follows : The Secretary of State, • Washington, D. C. : Sir : We, the undersigned, the National Piano Manufacturers' Association of America, the National Phonograph Co. (Edison), the Columbia Phonograph Co. and the Victor Talking Machine Co., beg leave to petition 'regarding the attitude to be taken by the United States delegate to the International Copyright Conference, to be held at Berlin on October 14, 1908. We have been informed that Mr. Thorvald Solberg, the Register of Copyrights, has been appointed delegate from this country, and while we do not know what his instructions are, we respectfully submit that the magnitude of our business interests and the far-reaching effect which new copyright legislation would have, not only on the capital invested in our respective industries, but also on everybody engaged in those industries, in this country, justify us in laying the matter before you to the end that any action taken may be with a full understanding of the situation While it may be that the action taken at Berlin, even though participated in by our government, may not be binding on the American Congress, there can be no doubt that the result arrived at in Berlin will have great weight when the matter is again taken up here. As your department may not be entirely conversant with the details of the copyright situation to-day as regards the mechanical reproduction of music, we beg leave to present a brief outline of it. In May, 1902, there existed an association known as the American Music Publishers' Association, comprising every large music publishing house in the United States, except two. Since then, one of those two has become a member. This association, then, controlled the output of sheet music in this country. The ^S^olian Co of New York in that month made contracts with every member of that association, whereby it was to receive the exclusive right to cut perforated rolls from all copyrighted music owned or controlled by the publishers nt anv time during the term of the contracts. viz. : thirty-five years. As the copyright term was then in effect forty-two years, the monopoly would be absolute for practically seventy-seven years. A suit was also instituted and carried to the United States Supreme Court, to obtain, if possible, a decision to the effect that a perforated roll for use in a player-piano is an infringement of the musical copyright under the existing United States statutes. It finally reached the Supreme Court for argument in January, 1908. In February, 1908, a decision was handed down to the effect that mechanical reproducing devices are not infringements of the present musical copyright. White-Smith Co. vs. Apollo Co., 209, U. S., 1. During the progress of this litigation determined efforts were made to amend the copyright laws so as to specifically include such devices. It would be trespassing unwarrantably on your time and patience to give the history of this tight in detail. The fight was bitter and three separate sets of public hearings have been had before the Joint Patent Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, viz. : June, 1906 : Decemb3r, 1906, and March. 1908. The arguments made at those hearings pro and con are contained in the printed records, which are respectfully called to your attention, particularly the printed proceedings of the hearings before the committees on patents of the Senate and House of Repi-esentatives, of March 26. 27, and 28, 1908, Generally speaking, the results of those hearings were : June, 1906 — No report. December. 1906 — House committee reported against any change in existing laws as regards musical copyrights, while Senate committee, by a vote of four to three, voted for the change. Senators Mallory, Foster, and Smoot submitted a minority report agreeing with the House Committee. No action was taken in either House up to the adjournment on March 4, 1907. March, 1908 — While neither committee has reported a bill, the consensus ot opinion appears to be in favor of extension of the copyright to include mechanical reproduction, provided, everybody has the right, under certain conditions, of reproduction on a universal royalty basis — the amount of royalty not yet agreed upon. Action is expected to be taken when Congress meets in December, and the bills now pending are as follows : Senator Smoot — Universal royalty on a percentage basis Senator Kittredge — Extension of copyright absolute and without conditiou Representative Currier — Universal royalty on a flat sliding scale. Representative Sulzer — Universal royalty on a basis of two cent? each on phonograph records and ten per cent, on retail price on perforated rolls. Representative Washburn — Universal royalty on an unnamed basis, but with right to owner of copyright to withhold composition from mechanical reproduction. Representative Barchfeld — Extension of copyright absolute and without condition. Senator Smoot is chairman of the Senate committee and Mr. Currier of the House committee One House-One Line |E, are the only TalKing' Machine House in E,astern Pennsylvania which has no branch stores, or that carries other lines. For this reason we are better equipped to give prompt and efficient service than others. Give us a trial. EDISON JOBBERS VICTOR DISTRIBUTORS PENN PHONOGRAPH CO., Inc. 17 South 9th Street PHILADELPHIA .\s we have stated above, the great weight of opinion in the Congressional committees appears to be against extending the copyright as an absolute right. We speak with knowledge, as we have participated in every step of the proceedings Of course, the extending of the right at all is one of expediency. Many arguments — some of them quite potent — have been made against any extension of the right. Our position as manufacturers is this : The National Piano Manufacturers' Association is interested only in the i^erforated roll business. Within a few years from now every piano must have a player mechanism. In view of the ease with which the ^olian Co obtained exclusive contracts in the past, it would be no difficult matter to obtain similar exclusive contracts in the future — although we contend that the old contracts would b3 operative under new legislation. Anybody having a monopoly of the rolls would unquestionably in time have a monopoly of the instruments. That the association seeks to prevent. If Congress should see fit to extend the copyright and give the composer a revenue, then not only would the composer be paid, but a monopoly of the player industry would be practically impossible if everybody had the right to manufacture upon payment of the stipulated royalty The phonograph companies signatory hereto are in exactly the same position — they want a square deal and nothing more. Everything we have said in the foregoing is borne out by the public records, either in the Supreme Court or in Congress. In the industries carried on by the undersigned there is invested directly about .«;150,000,000. This does not take into consideration at all the amount invested by dealers and jobbers throughout the country. The condition of the copyright laws in the various countries to-day is as follows : United States — All mechanical reproduction free. United Kingdom — .411 mechanical reproduction free, by decisions and special law of August, 1906. Germanj— Mechanical reproduction free, unless "expression" reproduced. This makes all phonographic records free. Belgium — All mechanical reproduction free. Switzerland — All mechanical reproduction free. Austria — All me..hanical reproduction free. France — All mechanical reproduction free as regards sounds, but not as regards words. Italy — Court of Intermediate Appeal, contrary to Berne Convention of 1886, which it signed, decided that such reproductions are forbidden. Court of last resort has not yet passed on question. Wherefore, we respectfully petition your excellency that the American delegate be instructed to work and vote in the deliberations of the Berlin Conference, against the absolute and unconditional extension of copyright to mechanical reproducing devices, and to go no further than a protection conditioned upon a universal right of user, such universal right to be based upon a royalty or revenue fixed, not by the conference, but by the internal legislation of the respective powers taking part. In reply to this petition, Acting-Secretary of State, Adee, stated that no instructions had been issued to Mr. Solberg in connection with his attendance at the International Copyright Conference. He was delegated by the State Department to represent the United States simply because of his knowledge of the copyright situation. He has no plenipotentiary powers, and in no way can commit the United States to any action taken by the Conference. As a matter of fact Mr. Solberg is present at the convention as a matter of courtesy, as the United States is not a party to the Berne convention. He will, of course, supply information regarding the copyright situation in this country if requested, but cannot vote or take any official action on any of the questions that may come up for consideration. An additional 25 feet is being added to the store floor of the Blaekman Talking Machine Co., New York. The stock will have additional room, while the private offices of President Blaekman and Vice-President Caldwell will be more spacious and comfortable. More room will also be afforded the general business office. New partitions and fi.xtures will beautify and adorn the expanded departments. Additional floor space has also been appropriated in the basement and sub-basement for storage. The company acquired the lease of the entire building, which extends through from Chambers to Reade street, some time ago. Clarence H. Seavey has sold out his interest in the firm of Seavey Bros, to his brother, and will open a music and jewelry store at 44 Winter i-trcrt, in the Nickel Theater Building, Haverhill, Mass., selling talking machines, pianos and jewelry. •