pyright, as complicated by the law in the United States,
would suppose that it was the last word on the subject. What the bill
did was to bring British legislation into better shape, and to amend it
on certain points which had worked unjustly. The great distinction
between the requirements for British and for American copyright still
remained, namely, the American manufacturing clause. Perhaps the most
notable innovation was the clause enabling a licence to be granted for
the publication of a copyright work where the owners of the copyright
had not exercised it for the "reasonable requirements" of the public.
Some such clause was clearly called for when the period of monopoly was
being extended; but the interpretation to be put upon the occasions
which would justify such interference might well be difficult. It may
perhaps be suggested that this innovation pointed to a reconsideration
of the true relations of "publishers" and "authors" (in the widest
sense) in respect of copyright, which sooner or later might be
approached from a different point of view. The new clause was intended
for the protection of the public from the mishandling of an author's
work after his death, while greater protection was given him during his
life. From a purely business point of view, the question might well be
whether a publisher or other party not the author should have a
copyright at all, and whether equity would not be satisfied if copyright
vested solely in the author and his family, with liberty to any one to
"publish" on fair terms, consideration being had to an original
publisher's reasonable claims and existing contracts. The advisability
of any such advance on the principle now asserted must depend rather on
experience of actual business and the working of the clause; but even
under the procedure provided by the bill of 1910 it would equally be
imperative for a publisher who owned a deceased author's copyright to
show that he had given or was giving the public valuable consideration
for his monopoly, in order to uphold it against any one willing, on
payment of a reasonable royalty, to serve the public better.

AUTHORITIES.--For special points see W. A. Copinger's _The Law of
Copyright in Works of Literature and Art_, 4th ed., by J. M. Easton
(1904); or T. E. Scrutton's _Law of Copyright_ (3rd ed., 1896). See
also E. J. MacGillivray, _A Treatise on the Law of Copyright_ (1902);
Richard Winslow, M.A., LL.B., _The Law of Arti