defence.
��80 Copyright Act, lijil.
§ 6 (3). of the copyright in the work for the
purposes of proceedings in respect of the infringement of coj^yright therein.
��Abolition of This provision becomes necessary by reason of the
registration. aboHtion of registration and of the prima facie proof of copyright which the certificate of registration now affords . Specific denial The first paragraph goes to the question of pleading, ^^*|*H^^ and requires a defendant specifically to deny either the existence of the copyright or the plaintiff's proprietor- ship thereof if he intends to rely on such a defence. It will be observed that a defendant is no longer called upon to allege who the true proprietor is. He may put the plaintiff's title in issue by a simple denial that the plain- tiff is the proprietor.
The provision is so framed as to apply equally to a motion for an interim injunction and to the trial of the action. In the first case the defendant must take the objection in his alfidavit and in the second in his defence. Frimd facie If the author's name is indicated on the work as such,
proof of title, iliQi^ if the plaintiff be not the author, he must trace his mTavour^of^ title from the author either by evidence of employment author named within sect. 5 (1) or by a written assignment or assign- on work. ments within sect. 5 (2). It does not appear to be neces- sary that the name shall be indicated on every copy of the work; that is to say, it will be prima facie proof of author- ship to put in evidence a copy of the work with the author's name indicated thereon in the usual manner, and such proof will not be rebutted merely by the defendant putting in evidence a copy with no author's name indicated thereon, and proving that if there was copying it must have been copying from such a copy. Whether It would even appear to be jDermissible in the case of author's name ^ book to put in evidence the author's manuscript from sufficient which the book was printed, and if the author's name appears as such on the manuscript that will be prima facie proof of authorship, and such proof will not be rebutted merely by showing that the author's true name was not printed on any published copy. Author's On the other hand, it would seem that evidence under name inserted ^his scction Cannot be manufactured for the purpose of
ad hoc. ^ ^
�� �
