Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 12.djvu/372

LITERAKY PROPERTY. 330 LITHIC ACID DIATHESIS. similar cop.vriglit protfclioii. The most impor- tant limitations in the eopyri{,^ht as granted in the act of 181)1 were the reijuirements that the foreign hook to secure protection of the American statute nuist be produceil from type set within the limits of the United States, and that two copies of tlic boolv so produced must be deposited in the Library of Congress not later than the date of publication of the work, in this or any foreign country. The requirement that the work of an American author should, in order to se- cure copyright in this country. l)e manufactured in this country was new. While, through the passage of the" act of 18!U, the United States had linally put itsdf on record in company with the other civilized and literature-producing and literature-consuming States of the world in recognizing the property rights of literary pro- ducers, it was not in a position to accept mem- bership in the Convention of IJern. The re- quirement that the copyrighted book nuist be manufactured in this country, coupled with the requirement for simultaneous publication, made conditions which were incompatible with the regulations accepted by the Bern Association. This additional measure for securing American copyright for aliens (and. under reciprocity, for- eign oo])yright for Americans), a measure which is the result of fifty-three years of effort on the part of individual workers and of successive copyright leagues, brings this country to the point reached bv France in 1810, and by Great Britain and the States of Germany in 18.30-37. Imperfect as the act may be as judged by the present standards of international copyright legislation, it not only marks a great advance in the development of public opinion and legisla- tive opinion in this country. l)ut has resulted in substantial gains for the authors of America, for the authors of (ireat Britain, and for the Ameri- can book-buying public. The risulis of this act have not proved wholly satisfactory. As far as it concerned authors whose books originated in a language other than English, the act has produced no real benefit. The authors of France, Germany, and Italy — States which are in direct intellectual relations with the United States, and whose governments have accorded to American writers the same copyright protection as it secured for their own authors — secure crfjiyright in form, Ijut not in fact. The difficulty of inducing .Kmerican pub- lishers to make investments in American editions of Continental books is not obviated liecause of the fact that the American law does not place the publishers in a position to protect themselves against unauthorized competing editions. Since the copyright secured for a translation of a book not copyrighted in this country in the original text would cover only the particular version, a piratical competitor might produce, in case the work should ]irove a success, another version reaping the advantage of the literary judgment and of the advertising contributed by the original and authorized publisher. As a result, the pro- duction of American editions of Continental works has, since the act of 1891. been incon- siderable. Foreign authors secured but trifling returns from American readers, for the simple fact that they secured veiy few readers, and American readers failed to obtain the advantage of a knowledge of current Continental literature, the reading of which would have widened their general cultivation and liavc helped to lessen in- ternational prejudice. The law has thus deprived American publishers, and all who have a business interest with the.se publishers in the trade of book-manufacturing, of the opportunity of mak- ing legitimate profit from the production of American editions of the works of Continental au- thors. The law has also proved defective in the provisions relating to the protection of works ol art, provisions which were framed some time in advance of the develo])ment of important meth- ods of art production, and in its failure to extend the term of copyright with a view to securing for the producers of intellectual property the con- trol for their productions during their own lite time, and of preserving for their heirs the enjoy ment of the results of these productions duiiiig a reasonable term after the death of the pm ducer. The United States should not have been satisfied with according to literary producers a smaller term of protection than is considerc I advisable by any other civilized State except! ii'.; Greece. The diverse theories in regard to literary ])rop- erty which, in the shaping of the copyright legis- lation of the world, have come into discussion may be briefly summarized as follows: First, property in an intellectual conception or creati<in is analogous to property in a material creation, and implies as comprehensive and unlimited a control for the production as that conceded liy the community to other classes of productions; second, intellectual property depends upon an individual agreement or convention, to which each per.son enjoying the use of a copy of a literary or artistic production makes himself a party; third, pi'operty in an intellectual pro- duction depends upon the natural or personal rights of the author, who, through unaiitliorizc.l appropriations, may suffer an injury or tort ; fourth, property in an intellectual production is the creation of statute, and is subject to limits depending not upon the natural rights of the producer, but upon the convenience or ad vantage of the community. Of these several theories or conceptions, it is the fourth which represents in substance the sur- vival of discussions of two centuries, and whiili has formed the basis of the copyright legislation of both Europe and America. For further particulars as to the copyright legislation now in force in the United States and elsewhere, see the title CopyBifiiiT. and consult the authorities there referred to. LITH'ARGE. See Lead. LITHEELAND, liTii'er-h/nd. A manufactur- ing town in Lancashire. England. 4'/;; miles north of Liverpool (Map: England. D 3). Population, in ISfll, 4500; in 1001, 10.000. LITHIC ACID DIATHESIS ( from Gk. i0- (.k6s, lithikos. relating to stone, from l6os. litlios, stone); Uric Acid Diathesis; Lith.emia: LiTHUBl.. An excessive production of lithic (or uric) acid and its salts in the body, coincidently with which there is lessened alkalinity of the blood, rendering that fluid less able to hold the acid and its salts in solution. The latter thus become deposited in various tissues, particularly in the joints and the spleen. Sufferers from this condition of things arc said to have the lithic acid diathesis. Their urine is of a dark golden