A Concise View of the Law of Copyright as Affecting Composers of Music

There are many aspects in which the subject of copyright might be regarded by the writer of a paper appointed to be read before this Association. It might be treated historically, and dressed with amusing anecdote; instances of bad or good fortune attending on certain well-known compositions might be recorded; lessons might be drawn from the high rewards obtained by the comic song or the dance tune, as compared with the poor financial results realised by the classical work of high intention and, it may be, of high achievement. Or, again, each composer or publisher might well and effectively occupy the attention of a meeting of the Association for the limited period allotted for discussion in treating this subject of copyright from the standpoint of his own special grievance or experience or criticism, and in offering for acceptance his own peculiar remedy or suggestion for amendment of the law. Or, again (to give as illustrations two points in the law of copyright so special in their character that they will need no further notice in this paper), the reader might treat the subject from the side of paradox. Eg. gr.: it is a maxim in the law of copyright that there can be no copyright in immoral publications: can there be immorality in music? Could we apply this maxim and deny copyright to a musical composition so trivial, so commonplace, or with so many consecutive fifths in it as to amount to musical immorality? Or again, the fifth section in the Copyright Act of 1842 empowers the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, on complaint that the proprietor of the copyright in any book (including printed music), after the death of its author, has refused to republish or allow the republication of the same, and that by reason of such refusal such book may be withheld from the public, to grant a license to the complainant to publish such book in such manner and subject to such conditions as they think fit; and the complainant may publish such book according to such license. Question raised: Would it be expedient to extend the principle of this provision to cases in the lifetime of the author, as, e.g., when the proprietor of the copyright in a musical composition has got possession of the plates and locked them up in his cellars, and refuses to reprint; and the composer, who sees in the publication of the work the passport to the recognition of his genius, laments the loss to the world of such a precious possession?