Page:The copyright act, 1911, annotated.djvu/78

 personal.

��66 Copyright Act, 1911.

§ 6 (2). the licensor. The same principle applies to a licence to

make use of a work in the preparation of a new work.

Such a licence implies the right to continue to print and reprint the new work as long as there is a demand therefor. How far A Cj[uestion arises as to how far a licence is purely par-

licence purely sonal to the grantee. It is clear that the licence em- braces the licensee and all servants and agents employed by him in the making of the work for which a licence was granted (d). Beyond this the licence is prima facie purely personal to the grantee, and no third party can rely upon it as a defence to an action brought against him. Even where the agreement containing the licence purports to be made between the parties "for themselves, their respective heirs, successors and assigns," yet if the licensee has undertaken contractual duties, the perform- ance of which depends upon his personal skill or repu- tation, then he cannot delegate such duties to a third person, and accordingly cannot transfer the licence to a third person (e). If, however, a publisher, for instance, continues to perform his personal obligations under a pub- lishing agreement, that is to say, continues to supervise the publication and to publish the work in his own name, he may at the same time enter into an agreement Avith a limited company to give the company the benefit of the agreement with the author, holding such agreement in trust for the company, and the company on their part under- taking to carry out the agreement as the agent of the pub- lisher (/).

When the licence is to make use of a copyright work in the preparation of a new work, once the new work is compiled within the terms of the licence, the licence must probably be deemed to permit not only the author of the new work, but also his representatives and successors in business, to continue to print and reprint the work. It is doubtful, however, whether by assigning the copyright of the new work to a third party he could assign to him the benefit of the licence and the right to reprint the work.

��{(I) Booth V. Richards (1910), The Times, July 14, 1910; Cop. Cas. 1905—10, p. 284.

{e) Booth V. Richards (1910), Cop. Cas. 1905—10, p. 284; The Times, July 14.

(V) Ihid.

�� �