Summary

Portrait of James Clark McReynolds James Clark McReynolds Washingtonian Pub Company v. Pearson…

Respondents concede that petitioner secured upon publication a valid copyright of The Washingtonian. But they insist that although prompt deposit of copies is not prerequisite to copyright, no action can be maintained because of infringement prior in date to a tardy deposit. Counsel assert-'The very foundation of the right to maintain an action for infringement is deposit of copies and registration of the work. Neither of these has the slightest bearing upon the creation of the copyright itself under section nine.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of James Clark McReynolds James Clark McReynolds Washingtonian Pub Company v. Pearson…

Read together as the Committee which reported the bill said they should be, sections twelve and thirteen show, we think, the Congress intended that prompt deposit when deemed necessary should be enforced through actual notice by the register; also that while no action can be maintained before copies are actually deposited, mere delay will not destroy the right to sue.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature