LETTER FROM THE SAME.
24, Great Marlborough-street, June 15, 1869.
Dear Sir,—I think your suggestion of the payment of a royalty upon the publication of an author’s work, if made mutual in both America and Great Britain, would go far to reconcile the two nations to abandon the present unfair reprisals; more especially if it were left to the option of any publisher to reproduce such works in the form most suited to his particular trade. Some publishers choose to publish in one form, and some in another, more or less expensive, according to the taste or want of their customers. It is true, there might be some difficulty in arranging the percentage per copy upon such a scheme; but that might be regulated according to the price and style of getting up of the work, which should always be determined upon before the work is issued.
The question of Copyright in music is one which presents features appertaining to itself exclusively. One feature which it shares along with the other fine arts is this great fact: that music is a universal language, and addresses itself equally to all nations. Its range, therefore, is far wider than literature. It needs no translation.
The taste for music is more widely diffused than that for painting and sculpture, from which it differs in a way that causes very considerable embarrassment when the question of Copyright comes to be particularly dealt with. Like paintings and statues, music may be reproduced in a permanent form; but, unlike them, the chief value of its Copyright privilege is reproduction in sounds, and, therefore, in a form unsubstantial and transient. He, therefore, who would deal satisfactorily with this branch of the wide question of Copyright has to provide for a demand, and overcome difficulties, such as do not belong to literary and artistic Copyright. But, still further, music—say that of an opera—may be separated into parts without serious diminution of its revenue-bearing value. Once more, there is the libretto; it belongs to the range of literature. Questions, therefore, arise, and must be provided for, with respect to the affinity of that part with the music, its reproduction in the form of translation, and its being, as it occasionally is, the work and property of an author other than the composer of the music.
There is still so much uncertainty, approaching to confusion, as to what really is the law, especially with regard to international Copyright, in this branch, that thorough revision and immediate international negotiations are absolutely necessary.
The laws of Copyright should be divested of all ambiguity and superfluous legal verbiage. In fact, they should be made so plain that “he that runs may read,” and understand them. The payment of a royalty on foreign works is not a new thing here. Chappell pays 1s. a copy, besides a considerable sum for the Copyright, of the last work of Rossini—viz., the “Messe Solennelle,” for the exclusive selling of the work, and for the right of performing it here. Any other information I can give you I shall be happy to afford.
I am, dear Sir, yours obediently,
C. H. Purday.
To R. A. Macfie, Esq., M.P.