Browse Documents By...
Original Language...
Documents For...
Browse Commentaries By...
Browse Referred Persons By...
Encyclopaedia Article on 'The Reprinting of Books', Leipzig and Halle (1740)
Source: Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen 34 A 398 [Reprint Edition of 1995]
Citation:
Encyclopaedia Article on 'The Reprinting of Books', Leipzig and Halle (1740), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org
Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Translation only | Transcription only | Show all | Bundled images as pdf
And such brazen transgressors of supreme decrees have no
cause for complaining if their reprints are confiscated and
they themselves are also made to pay the fine stipulated in
the privilege. See Elector Johann George II's edict of 1661,
§.81, and also Johann George I's Rescript on the
intercalated reprinting of books issued with privileges in the
Codex Augusti, vol.1, p.410 (Carpzow in Jurispr. Consist.,
Book II, def.414). If, however, the rightful publishers have
no privileges for their works, it is not unreasonable to ask
whether the books they publish may be reprinted without
their consent by other publishers with right and a safe
conscience. This question is answered 'yes' by some, and
'no' by others, depending on whether their character is
honest or unsound. Those who say 'no' have the most
convincing arguments as well as the approval of divine and
human laws. Those who say 'yes', on the other hand, do so
on the basis of fallacious presumptions. One is therefore
compelled to agree with the former, since the truth of the
matter calls for an impartial judgement. It is all the easier,
then, to adequately refute the specious objections of the
latter. As for a thorough proof of this opinion, the
arguments which can be adduced in its favour depend on
the following circumstances. Books are written by scholars
with the intention not just of benefiting others but also of
earning, in return for their hard work, something towards
their daily subsistence. No one will deny that what these
writers' inventiveness has brought forth and their untiring
diligence has put into good order, belongs to them. If it is
their property then they are entitled to use it as a means of
subsistence as they wish and as they find suitable to achieve
this aim as conveniently as possible. Only they have the
right to use their work in this manner and to exclude others
from doing so. The most expedient way for them to achieve
this aim is to hand over their scholarly work for printing
and by means of this to let others own it in exchange for
money. If, let us assume, they carry this out at their own
expense, then no one is allowed to encroach by reprinting
on their free and rightful use of what belongs to them. For,
as we have already postulated, it is their property. This
property right gives them the complete power to exclude
others from using it in the same way. However, certain
circumstances do not allow them to personally take care of
the publication and sale of their book. They find themselves
compelled to ask for help from those whose profession it is
to publish books and trade in them. They offer them their
manuscripts in return for the payment of a reasonable price.
The latter thus acquire the scholar's work.
The consequence of this ¦
No Transcription available.
Source: Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen 34 A 398 [Reprint Edition of 1995]
Citation:
Encyclopaedia Article on 'The Reprinting of Books', Leipzig and Halle (1740), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org
Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Translation only | Transcription only | Show all | Bundled images as pdf
And such brazen transgressors of supreme decrees have no
cause for complaining if their reprints are confiscated and
they themselves are also made to pay the fine stipulated in
the privilege. See Elector Johann George II's edict of 1661,
§.81, and also Johann George I's Rescript on the
intercalated reprinting of books issued with privileges in the
Codex Augusti, vol.1, p.410 (Carpzow in Jurispr. Consist.,
Book II, def.414). If, however, the rightful publishers have
no privileges for their works, it is not unreasonable to ask
whether the books they publish may be reprinted without
their consent by other publishers with right and a safe
conscience. This question is answered 'yes' by some, and
'no' by others, depending on whether their character is
honest or unsound. Those who say 'no' have the most
convincing arguments as well as the approval of divine and
human laws. Those who say 'yes', on the other hand, do so
on the basis of fallacious presumptions. One is therefore
compelled to agree with the former, since the truth of the
matter calls for an impartial judgement. It is all the easier,
then, to adequately refute the specious objections of the
latter. As for a thorough proof of this opinion, the
arguments which can be adduced in its favour depend on
the following circumstances. Books are written by scholars
with the intention not just of benefiting others but also of
earning, in return for their hard work, something towards
their daily subsistence. No one will deny that what these
writers' inventiveness has brought forth and their untiring
diligence has put into good order, belongs to them. If it is
their property then they are entitled to use it as a means of
subsistence as they wish and as they find suitable to achieve
this aim as conveniently as possible. Only they have the
right to use their work in this manner and to exclude others
from doing so. The most expedient way for them to achieve
this aim is to hand over their scholarly work for printing
and by means of this to let others own it in exchange for
money. If, let us assume, they carry this out at their own
expense, then no one is allowed to encroach by reprinting
on their free and rightful use of what belongs to them. For,
as we have already postulated, it is their property. This
property right gives them the complete power to exclude
others from using it in the same way. However, certain
circumstances do not allow them to personally take care of
the publication and sale of their book. They find themselves
compelled to ask for help from those whose profession it is
to publish books and trade in them. They offer them their
manuscripts in return for the payment of a reasonable price.
The latter thus acquire the scholar's work.
The consequence of this ¦
No Transcription available.