Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/269

 248

The Green Bag

would be without compensation and at the same time would be under a covenant to perform for no one else. Contracts. Water Rates—Defective Meter— Construction of City Charter. N. Y. The charter of the City of New York pro vides that the consumer shall pay for water according to the registration of a meter. In People ex rel. McAuliffe v. City of New York et al., 114 N. Y. Suppl. 312, it appeared that the meter of respondent had failed for some months to record, although water was being used continually. The New York Supreme Court remarked that although the neglect of the officials of the city has perhaps given relator something for nothing, it is the plain mandate of the charter that no charge can be be made except for water actually used as shown by the meter. If the meter showed nothing, the charter seems to allow no charge, Copyrights. Dramatic Composition not a Book—Domestic Manufacture Unnecessary. U. S. Congress has intended all through its copy right enactments to distinguish between books and dramatic compositions, said the United States Circuit Court for the southern district of New York in Paul Hervieu v. /. S. Ogilvie Publishing Co., decided in March, 1909 (N. Y. L. J. Apr. 5). A dramatic composi tion, even though printed in book form, is not a book within the meaning of section 4956 of the copyright law. Hence a dramatic composition need not be printed from plates made or type set up in the United States to be entitled to full copyright protection. Copyrights. Transcript Play—Common Law Rule—Publication. Ill. The author of a drama does not lose his common law right in the production by public performance, when the drama is not printed in a book, as the federal copyright law does not apply to any drama not printed in a book, said the Illinois Supreme Court in Frohman v. Ferris, 238 Ill. (adv. sheets) 430. Though a different rule prevails in England under the act of 5 and 6 Vict., in this country public performance of a play from manu script is not equivalent to a publication. Copyrights. Moving Picture Shows— Author's Permission to Dramatization. U. S. In a decision rendered in March in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, a

moving picture exhibition was held to be a stage representation violative of the rights of the author's copyrighted book. The ques tion arose in a suit brought by Klaw & Erlanger and Harper & Brothers against the Kalem Company to enjoin the moving picture exhibitions of "Ben-Hur." The Court held that in order to give a moving picture ex hibition it was necessary to take the novel of the author and prepare a synopsis or story, which was in effect a dramatization, and that the author alone had the right to make or authorize a dramatization. Corporations. Criminal Law—Indictments Under Elkins Act. U. S. "Some of the earlier writers on common law held the law to be that a corporation could not commit a crime. . . . The modern authority, universally, so far as we know, is the other way. ... It is true that there are some crimes which, in their nature, cannot be committed by corporations. But there is a large class of offenses, of which rebating under the federal statutes is one, wherein the crime consists in purposely doing the things prohibited by statute. In that class of crimes we see no good reason why corporations may not be held responsible for and charged with the knowledge and purposes of their agents, acting within the authority conferred upon them. 2 Morawetz, Priv. Corp. §733; Green's Brice, Ultra Vires, 366." Per Mr. Justice Day, in New York C. & H. R. R. Co. v. U. S., decided Feb. 23, 1909. Corporations. Criminal Law—When In dictable for Manslaughter. N. Y. Within the principles declared by the Supreme Court of the United States in New York C. & H. R. R. Co. v. U. S., decided Feb. 23, 1909 (see supra), the New York Court of Appeals expressed the opinion, in People v. Rochester Ry. & Lt. Co., decided Mar. 23 (N. Y. L. J. Apr. 7) that certain forms of manslaughter might be defined in a statute applicable to corporations, making a corporation criminally liable for homicide under certain circumstances. But the Court considered the New York Penal Code not to make a corporation indictable for man slaughter. The New York Law Journal (April 7) com ments on this decision editorially:— It is a source of satisfaction that both the Supreme Court of the Un ited States and the New York Court of Appeals recognize the