Literary Property

The interest of an author, or those who claim under him, in his work before or after publication, and with or without copyright. Drone, Copyright, 97. Literary property is the common-law ownership of the original work. Copyright is the statutory right to make all the copies of it that shall be made for a term of years. Abbott. The scope of such property is, in the absence of copyright laws, that an author has the sole right of first printing and publishing his writings. 4 Burrows, 2408. The author's property right is lost as soon as he prints and publishes the manuscript (8 Pet. [U. S.] 591); though a private use or circulation of a manuscript, as for the purpose of instructing students, will not forfeit the author's literary property. By statute, a penalty is denounced against the publication of a manuscript without the author's consent. Rev. St. U. S. § 4966. LITERATURA (Lat. from litera, a letter).

In old English law. Education; learning; knowledge of letters. Ad literaturam ponere, to put to learning; to put to school. Par. Ant. 401; Cowell. Minus sufficiens in literatura, deficient in education.

The general term which describes the interest of an author in his works, or of those who claim under him, whether before or after publication, or before or alter a copyright has been secured. 9 Am. L. Reg. 44; Woolsey V. Judd, 4 Duer (N. Y.) 379; id., 11 llow. Pr. (N. Y.) 49; 2 Bla. Com. 405; 4 Viner Abr. 278; Bacon Abr. Frorouation (P 5); 2 Kent 306; Nickl, Lit Prop.; Shortt, Copyr.; Morgan, Law of Lit. A person has a property in his literary productions, and by the common law, as long as they are kept within his possession, he has the same right of exclusive enjoyment of them as of any other species of personal property; Rees v. Peltzer, 76 111. 475. See 4 H. L. C. 962; Kiernan v. Telegraph Co., 50 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 194. So of a painting; Caliga v. Newspaper Co., 157 Fed. 186, 84 0. C. A. 634. He loses his rights if he offers such property to the public for sale without being copyrighted; Bamlorth v. Mach. Co., 158 Fed. 355. I absolute right therein while unpul^lis^ed; the author might permit the use of his production, and might give a copy thereof, without parting with his property riglit; an author does not lose his right to a play by a public representation; Frohman v. Ferris, 238 111. 430, 87 N. E. 327, 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 639, 128 Am. St. Rep. 135, affirmed in 22.3 U. S. 424, 32 Sup. Ct. 263, 56 L. Ed. 492 (it appeared here that there had been a public performance of the play in England and that such performance there was under the English law e<iuivaleut to a publication). The publication of a book as that of an- / other, when in fact it is not such, is said to constitute such an injury as entitles such other person to an injunction, although the misrepresentation does not amount to the infringement of a copyright; the case is not altered by the fact that the representation is true in part, if the public are likely to be misled to the plaintiff’s injury; 1 Spelling, Extr. Rel. 887. An injunction was granted ■at the suit of Ijord Byron to prevent the publication In his name or as his work of poems proved not tO’ have been written by him; 2 Merlv. 29; and at the suit of Bret liarte to prevent the publication of a book in such manner as to lead the public to suppose he had written it when he had actually written but a small portion; 1 Cent. L. J. 360., Where a plaintiff refused to edit a new edition of a law book written by him, the copyright of which was owned by the defendant, and the latter had the necessary alterations made for himself and the work (containing numerous errors) published without notice that it was not prepared by the original author, the jury were instructed to find for the plaintiff if they believed that the new edition would be understood by those who bought it to have been prepared by the plaintiff; 5 C. & F. 219. An injunction was refused to prevent the publication under plaiutitt’s name of a mutilated edition of the autobiography of Lord Herbert of Cherbury; 67 L. T. N. S. 263; Kekewich, J., said an action for damages might lie if the writer’s reputation were injured. An injunction was refused a physician who claimed a breach of contract on the part of the publisher of his book. But in this case the contract was to produce a ‘‘first class” book from manuscript to be furnished for a medical text book. The contract was held too indefinite to be specifically enforced; Cleveland v. Martin, 218 111. 73, 75 N. B. 772, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 629. In every writing the autkor has a property at common law, which descends to his representative, but is not liable to seizure by creditors so that they can publish it; Ucation will be restrained in equity; 4 Burr. 2320, 2408; 2 Bro. P. C. 138; Hoyt v. Mackenzie, 8 Barb. Ch. (N. Y.) 320, 49 Am. Dec. 178; 2 Mer. 434; 1 Ball & B. 207; Folsom v. Marsh, Z Sto. 100, Fed. Gas. No. 4,901. The passage of the copyright acts has not abrogated the common-law rights of an author to his unpublished manuscript, and for a wanton Infringement of his rights, exemplary damages may be given; Press Pub. Co. v. Monroe, 73 Fed. 196, 19 O. C. A. 429, 61 L. R. A 353. Letters are embraced within this principle; for, although the receiver has a qualihed property in them, the right to o Ih ject to their publication remains with the writer. It is held, however, that the receiver may publish them for the purposes of justice publicly administered, or to vindicate his character from an accusation publicly made; 2 V. & B. 19; Folsom v. Marsh, 2 Stor. 100, Fed. Gas. No. 4,901; 2 Atk. 342; Grigsby v. Breckinridge, 2 Bush (Ky.) 480, 92 Am. Dec. 509; Denis v. Le Clerc, 1 Mart O. S. (La.) ' 297, 6 Am. Dec. 712; Woolsey v. Judd, 4 Duer (N. Y.) 379. The receiver may destroy or give away the letters, as soon as received: Grigsby v. Breckinridge, 2 Bush (Ky.) 480, 92 Am. Dec. 509. The lat,ter proposition has been doubted; see Drone, Gopyr. 137. The biographer of Whistler was allowed to use Whistler’s letters in his possession as giving him information as to Whistler’s habits, character, opinions and doings, but not to publish any quotation from them or the substance of any letter; L1907J 2 Gh. 577. See CoPYMGHr; Manuscbipx; LiTTEB. LITERiS OBLIGATIO. In Roman Law. An obligation created by an entry made in one of the books kept by the head of a Roman family, called the codex accepti et expensi. The creditor made an entry to the effect that a certain sum had been paid by him to the debtor, and the debtor made a corresponding entry indicating such a payment to him by the creditor; but it was sullicieut if the creditor’s entry was made by direction of the debtor, in which case an entry by the debtor was unnecessary. The effect was to constitute an obligation under which the debtor was liable, whether the money was actually paid or not. He was said to be bound Uteris, i. e. by the writing in the codex as such. The entry itself created the obligation to pay. It was immaterial whether it was based upon an obligation to pay existing in fact The item in the codex was called the nortven, and this species of contract might either create an oh* ligation or transform one» \. e. operate as a novation, in which case it was called nomen tranacripttcium* The literia ob Ugatio was distinguished from the nomen arcarium, another species of entry in the codex accepti et expenai. This has been termed a mere cash item. It was an entry of a concrete or existing ground of obligation, in which case the In the time of the empire the literal contract fell into disuse. The three classes of books kept by the pater* familiaa were: (1) the liber patrimonii, or libellua familice, in which was kept inventories of the property, and liber kalendarii, which was a list of capital sums let out at interest; (2) the codex ratio* num, which was the regular account book in which were entered receipts and expenses; (3) the codex accepti et expensi, designed not merely to afford evidence of, but also to effect, changes in the state of a person's property. Qaius, Inst. Ill, §§ 128-31, describes the literia ob* ligatio as being made in two ways: (1) A re in personam, where the obligation was entered in the form of a debt under the name of the original purchaser or debtor; (2) a persona in personam, where a debt already standing under one nomen was transferred by novation from that one to another. Some writers lay great stress upon the fact that the obligation a re in personam was first entered as a memorandum in a day book or waste book {adversaria ephemeria), but It has been truly remarked that this fact, although indisputable, has no legal importance; and this is apparent from the nature of the two transactions. » There is some difference in the statement of these obligations by different authors, but that which is here given is the result of the more recent invcstigatlons, having been established by Voigt, Abhandl. der Koen. Saechs. Gesellschaft der Wlssenschaften, yol. 10, 515. See Sohm., Inst. Rom. L. § 68 and note 1, where reference may be found to the authors on the subject.

See Literary.

Defined under Property in Black's Law Dictionary.