Historical
evidence on author-publisher relations in the developing book trade in
late-seventeenth century England as seen by Lindenbaum highlights that literary
property, as the right of the author, was considered distinct from and had
encompassed the publisher’s copyright. The earliest preserved contractual
agreement that transferred a right to print from the author to his publisher
was John Milton’s publication contract with Samuel Simmons for Paradise
Lost in April of 1667. In
this contract, Milton agreed to accept five pounds at the commencement of the
contract, five pounds at the end of the first edition (when 1,300 copies had
been sold to “particular reading Customers”), and five pounds each at the end
of the second and third impressions (of 100 works each) in return for the
manuscript of Paradise Lost. Both Milton and Simmons agreed that
these three editions would not run more than 1,500 copies each. Twenty pounds
for a manuscript of an epic poem extremely seems modest by the standards of
that time, but evidence of the amount typically paid for the sale of a
manuscript when Simmons purchased Paradise Lost is too scant to conclusively determine
that Milton was underpaid for the poem. While a publisher’s unfair treatment of
an author might indicate a superior position in the author-publisher
relationship that would have allowed it to control all of the rights to print
and sell manuscripts, this did not appear to be the case with Milton’s contract
and the circumstances surrounding its signing. To the contrary, Milton appeared
to have the upper hand in this arrangement, as the contract contained
provisions that protected Milton as an owner of specific property rights in the
manuscript even after the right to print the work had been assigned to Simmons.
Perhaps the most
telling sign that Milton retained some form of literary property in Paradise
Lost after assigning the right to print to Simmons was that one of the
clauses in Milton’s contract allowed him to demand an accounting of sales at
reasonable intervals. Should Simmons fail to provide such accounting as
demanded, Simmons would be under a duty to pay Milton the five pounds for the
whole impression as if it were due then rather than after completing the sales
of 1,300 copies of the poem. The inclusion of such a clause into the contract seems
to indicate that both Milton and Simmons thought that the author of a
manuscript possessed some form of property right in the work even after the
right to print the work was assigned to a printer. Because the right to demand
an accounting of sales was a legal or equitable right that only a co-owner of a
property interest or a beneficiary in a trust relationship could own, it
appears that both Milton and Simmons considered the author of a manuscript its
property owner, putting the printer in possession of the manuscript in the
position of a trustee for as long as they owned the more limited right to print
the work. Lindenbaum also points to another clause in the contract that
suggests that Milton was in possession of some form of property right in the
work. The cap on 1,500 copies of the work that Simmons could print ensured that
the printer’s profits would not disproportionally exceed the author’s due and
provides additional evidence to support the claim that the printer possessed a
more limited right to print the work that stemmed from the author’s more
encompassing property right. Milton’s publication contract for Paradise
Lost thus provides a rare and invaluable glimpse into a notion of
literary property as an author’s right acknowledged by both authors and
publishers even before authors were recognized as capable of owning copyright
in their work.
Questions:
·
While this contract in many ways showed some authorial
understanding or legal savvy on Milton’s part, in what way was the contract
lacking as evident by the destitution of his granddaughter?
·
Would you agree with the notion that it was
desperation due to being out-of-favor that motivated Milton to use Simmons?
No comments:
Post a Comment