Rights. 67
In the case of Evans v. Tout {g), the author of certain § 5 (2).
transcripts from Welsh manuscripts granted a licence to ■
the professor of Welsh in the Victoria University, Man- chester, to make use of his transcripts for the purpose of compiling an educational book intituled " An intro- duction to Early Welsh." The book was prepared by the professor, and he had arranged for its publication by the University Press, when he died. The University pro- cured another professor to see the book through the press, and write a preface. The author of the Welsh manu- scripts complained that his copyright was infringed, and, inte?- alia, alleged that the licence was purely personal in favour of the professor who died, and did not extend to the publication of a work edited and prefaced by. another ma;n. The case was ultimately compromised on the defendant's consenting to publish the book with a new preface in a form to be approved by the Vice-Chan- cellor of the University.
It is submitted that, notwithstanding the provision that EfiPeotof oral a licence shall not be valid unless it is in writing, an oral ^^"f °°^ ^^ ^^ licence may operate as an estoppel. The owner of the copyright could not, having granted an oral licence, sue the licensee and recover damages for acts done within the terms of such licence and without any revocation of the licence on the part of the owner of the copyright. An oral licence, however, whatever its terms, may be re- voked at any time, and proceedings may be taken in respect of any act done after the revocation. An oral licence will not estop any assignee of the copyright from taking proceedings, even although he took his assignment with notice of such licence.
The object of the proviso is to secure the fruits of the Proviso, extended period of copyright to the author's family, and to prevent the whole benefit going to the publishers. Apparently, the proviso applies to all works to which the Act applies, including those where the copyright is measured not by a period of years after the death of the author, but by a period of years after the making of the work. Thus, it apparently applies to copyriglit in photo- graphs and records, so that, if the co25yright in such works does exceed the period of the author's life and twenty-
��iff) Cop. Cas. 1905—10, p. 213 ; The Times, Febrimry 11, 1909.
f2
�� �
