Monthly Archives: July 2010

The mystery of the copyright deposit piles

4
Filed under Registration

A couple of months ago, I posted a picture from the  Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division. The picture, from the late 1800s, shows piles of copyright deposit materials on the floor in the Thomas Jefferson Building.

At the time, I joked about whether this was evidence of a registration backlog at the Copyright Office from a century ago. This turns out (drum roll) not to be the case.

I had the good fortune to be in Washington, DC for a short stretch this month. I took a brief trip to the National Archives in College Park, MD to look over some of the old files on Department of Justice copyright prosecutions. Among the various documents was a memo from H.L. Godfrey, an attorney at the DOJ in the late ’40s  and early ’50s. I’ve included the memo below, which is somewhat interesting in it’s own right. The real gem, at least for solving this mystery, was the memo’s citation to hearings by the Librarian of Congress from early in the 1900s.

Librarian Of Congress from “Copyright Hearings — Bills S. 6330, S. 2499,  S. 2900, H.R. 19853, H.R. 243, H.R. 11794–June 1906, December, 1906, March 1908,” pages 14 and 15:

The other matter is that of’ copyright deposits, the volume of these is now prodigious. During the last year alone the articles deposited exceeded 200,000 in number. A large proportion of these are of great value to the library and are drawn up into it. The rest remain in the cellar. The accumulations in the cellar now number a million and a half items. Many of these would be useful in other Government libraries; for instance, medical books in the library of the Surgeon General’s Office. Some of them might be useful in exchange with other libraries. A few might have value in exchange with dealers. The remainder are a heavy charge upon the Government for storage and care. The ought to be returned to the proprietors of the copyright if they want them, or, if not wanted, destroyed. [Emphasis added.]

So there we have it. The piles of deposits were apparently post-registration documents in which the Library of Congress had no interest — a turn of the century collection of bad art that wasn’t quite good enough to make the cut. So, so sad.

The solving of one mystery just leads to another. What happened to all of the works?

This has to be the greatest collection of bad art in the history of humankind. Did the Library light a giant bonfire and dance around the works bidding them adieu? Did they carry them to the trash in bags, one by one. Did it take years, months, decades?

Are they still there?

Someone out there must know the answer to this little mystery.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Download (PDF, 3.41MB)

copyright attorneys

Massachusetts Act on automobile diagnostic and repair info

0
Filed under News

Last week the Washington Post reported on a bill, Sen. No. 2268, that is making its way through the Massachusetts legislature (included below). The Bill would make car companies provide independent owners and repair shops with the same information and tools that they make available to their authorized dealers, on the same terms.

The Post portrays the Bills as a conflict between “mom-and-pop repair shops” and  manufacturers such as Honda who have “vigorously opposed the right-to-repair bill on the federal level and in other states, such as New Jersey and Arizona.”  A spokesman from a car trade group, in opposition, claimed the Bill would enable aftermarket parts companies to make “inexpensive parts in foreign countries without incurring research and development costs.”

The Bill would grant car owners and repair shops the right to bring an M.G.L. 93(a) (consumer protection and unfair trade practices) claim against an auto manufacturer for treble damages and attorneys’ fees if they do not make the following available on a “reasonable and nondiscriminatory basis and cost as compared to the terms and costs charged to an authorized dealer:

  • The same information for the diagnosis, service, or repair of any motor vehicle that the manufacturer makes available to its authorized dealers and authorized motor vehicle repair facilities.
  • The same tools and software capabilities, including wireless capabilities, related to the diagnosis, service, and repair of a motor vehicle that the manufacturer makes available to an authorized dealership or an authorized motor vehicle repair facilities of the motor vehicle.

Car companies would also have to provide aftermarket tool companies with information that would allow them to  manufacture tools with the same functional characteristics as those tools made available by the manufacturers to  authorized dealers or to an authorized motor vehicle repair facility — I assume this means schematics.

Comments:

I find the mechanics of this bill fascinating, though I’m not sure what type of affect it will have, if any. The Supreme Court has found that offering only a collection of movies to theaters violates antitrust laws. Loews, Inc. v. U.S., 334 U.S. 131 (1948) (“The antitrust laws do not permit a compounding of the statutorily conferred monopoly.”) That is, an intellectual property rightsholder is not insulated from claims targeting anticompetitive behavior just because they Copyright or Patent Acts grant owners exclusive rights. So, there does not appear to be an immediate preemption issue.

The requirement that car companies make information available to aftermarket tool companies is also interesting. One wonders if there will be many copyright suits brought targeting potentially infringing goods that were manufactured from car company specs. We may end up seeing a lot of cases on whether a specific part is a useful article that does not merit copyright protection.
-

Download (PDF, 202.59KB)

copyright attorneys