Hi. Copyright rules from that period are outside of my expertise. (And
that of most people's, even in copyrightland.  ;-) ) 

The big book of US copyright, which does cover some of this historical
stuff, is by Melville & David Nimmer- but you may have to hunt around
for it in a law school library. 

http://bookstore.lexis.com/bookstore/product/10441.html

My understanding is that _articles_ weren't usually thought of as under
copyright back in those days. (MT rewrote his materials from the form
they had appeared in journals for book publication, yes?) Today we would
call them something more like "a work made for hire." I.e., I write it,
you pay me, and you publish it in the newspaper/journal. End of
transaction. 

If that guess is close to right, then Daddy Grant or Bonner or somebody
_may_ have been trying to preserve what they hoped would turn into book
rights on their text. 

DDD 

________________________________

From: Arianne [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 2:13 AM
To: David Davis; Mark Twain Forum
Subject: Re: FW: Copyright question


Many thanks, David.  Does anyone have an opinion (or knowledge!) whether
there would
be any consequences if someone didn't reespect this primitive version of
the copyright?
What could Bonner have been trying to protect?  Reproduction of the
article?

Dana co-authored a biography of Grant which drew from the articles for
information about
Grant's youth, apparently the only source available.

Wondering,
Arianne.  



On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 2:43 PM, David Davis <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Hi. I did ask around, and it appears that, for that early date (the
Copyright Office was not taking registrations yet) an author could,  in
effect, "timestamp" there work at a courthouse. It sounds like that is
what is happening there. Essentially, "Entered in the Clerk's Office"
was that era's equivalent of copyright registration.

Does that help?

DDD


On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:08 PM, David Davis <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:


	Hi. I don't know, but I will ask around and let you know if I
find
	anything out!
	
	My understanding (which may be wrong) is that copyright was not
normally
	accorded to articles appearing only in the newspapers in those
days.
	
	
	What are the exact words around - "...registered with the
district..."
	(Can you give me the whole sentence?)
	
	DDD
	
	
	
	________________________________
	
	From: Arianne [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
	Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 4:51 PM
	To: Mark Twain Forum
	Subject: Copyright question
	
	
	Dear Mr. Davis,
	
	Do you, or does anyone have knowledge about the reality of
copyright
	protection back in 1868?
	
	Robert Bonner of The Ledger in New York commissioned Jesse Grant
to
	write
	articles about his son, Ulysses.  At the bottom of the first
column he
	recorded that
	they'd been registered with a district something.  Am I correct
in
	assuming this
	was an effort to copyright the articles?   (He did not add that
	protection to articles by Greely or H.W. Beecher.)
	
	And if so, what would infringe upon the copyright?   Would there
be
	consequences?
	
	Charles Dana of the SUN published the Ledger Grant articles in
his paper
	BEFORE they appeared in the Ledger!
	
	Would this have any legal implications in those days?
	
	All this is significant to me in connection with an issue
involving
	Twain.
	
	THANKS for any opinions or help,
	Arianne Laidlaw