COMMON  LAW  COPYRIGHT,  PUBLICATION  AND  AUTHOESHIP      163

on  these  original  ideas,  had  an  author,  to  wit,  the
adaptor  of  the  original  play.  So  the  arranger,  not
the  composer  of  the  original  work  of  music,  is  the
author  of  the  resultant  arrangement.'*^

One  who  took  a  cast  of  fruit  and  leaves  is  the  The  'maker  of
author  of  the  resulting  cast,*^  as  an  exercise  of  *^^**'
ingenuity,    artistic    taste    and    arrangement    and
modeling  was  involved.  g  ^^^

One  who  sent  out  questions  to  a  number  of  golf  Compilation,
players  and  compiled  biographical  notes  from  the
answers,  was  the  author  of  such  notes.**  So  it  would
appear  in  the  case  of  a  compilation,  he  who  exercised
the  selective  thought  necessary  to  obtain  the  result  ^®
is  the  author.  So  in  the  case  of  a  dramatization,  or
arrangement,  or  adaptation,  of  a  work,  the  author
would  not  be  the  author  of  the  original  work,  but  the
person  whose  thought  was  the  preponderating  cause
in  the  effect  which  we,  in  such  cases,  call  dramatiza-
tion,*^ or  arrangement,  or  adaptation.*"  This  seems
correct,  as  he  is  the  one  who  exercised  new  thought
in  their  arrangement  and  compilation.  g  ^^g

In  Walter  v.  Lane,*''  it  was  held  a  reporter  of  the  Verbatim
London  Times  who  made  shorthand  notes  of  a  public,  reports.^^
uncopyrighted,  original  speech  by  Lord  Eosebury
and  published  a  verbatim  report  thereof  from  such
notes,  was  the  author  of  that  report,  to  an  extent
entitling  his  employer  to  copyright  in  the  report.
