Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 14.djvu/185

Rh think that a couple of generations would probably be as much as in practice is really needed; but, if you ask me what I think is his abstract right, I should certainly say that the man should have the property in perpetuity, and be able to hand it down to his children like any other property.

Q. Then on what theory is our present copyright law framed, if that is your opinion?

A. I would rather decline to have to justify the existing copyright law at all; I am not concerned in doing so; I think that it is not easily justifiable.

Q. That brings us to a practical question: how would you practically embody in legislation your idea of the principles of a just copyright law.

A. That would really be a matter requiring very grave consideration.

Q. Let us take it in stages. First of all, at all events, you would insist upon the absolute right of the author to a property in his book?

A. Yes.

Q. In perpetuity?

A. I do not insist upon perpetuity.

Q. I mean simply for the moment, abstractedly?

A. For the present.

Q. Then you would recognize that there might be reasons of public policy why it should not be granted in perpetuity?

A. I would rather say that it is not worth while practically to attempt to get a thing which it is hardly likely you will be able to get under the present state of the public feeling. If we had to begin de novo, I should certainly insist upon the perpetuity of the property, but at present I think that it would be impracticable and hardly worth while.

Q. Still, going upon your principle that, abstractedly, the author ought to have it in perpetuity, of course it would only be a reservation on the ground of public policy, or something of that sort, which would justify a limitation?

A. I think that there is another justification, namely, that it is not worth while in real life to attempt to get things which it is impossible to get.

Q. We are really looking at the matter for the moment from different standing-points: I am not asking you to consider it from the point of view of an author who is willing to take what he can get; I am asking you, if you will do so for the moment, to look at it simply from the point of view of a statesman who is considering what ought to be the principles of the law. First of all you lay down a very wide and general principle, namely, that an author is entitled to the ideas which he embodies in a book as much as any other person who owns property, whether it is a table or an acre of land, is entitled to it?