Legal Definitions - comprint

Comprint

Historically, the term comprint was mistakenly understood by some to refer to the illegal act of secretly printing and selling copies of a book for which another bookseller or publisher legally held the exclusive rights. This erroneous definition suggested a specific offense of unauthorized reproduction, particularly prevalent in the early days of copyright law.

However, despite its appearance in some historical dictionaries as a legal term, no such specific legal offense called "comprint" ever actually existed in law. The term was incorrectly defined by certain lexicographers and subsequently copied, perpetuating the misconception.

In its proper historical usage, comprint was actually a verb meaning "to share in the printing of a book." It described a collaborative effort among printers or booksellers to produce a publication.

• Example 1 (Misconception of an Offense): Imagine an 18th-century London bookseller, Mr. Thorne, who held the exclusive rights to print a popular collection of poems. Upon discovering that a rival, Mr. Finch, was secretly producing and selling unauthorized copies of the same collection, Mr. Thorne might angrily accuse Mr. Finch of "comprinting" his work. While Mr. Finch's actions constituted copyright infringement (an actual illegal act), Mr. Thorne would be using a term that, in a legal sense, was a phantom offense. The specific legal charge of "comprint" did not exist, even though the act of unauthorized copying was indeed unlawful.

• Example 2 (True Meaning of Collaboration): Consider two prominent printing houses in 17th-century Paris, "La Maison du Livre" and "L'Imprimerie Royale." They decide to pool their resources to produce a monumental new atlas, a project too large and costly for either to undertake alone. Each house contributes presses, skilled artisans, and paper, working together to print different sections of the atlas. In this collaborative scenario, they would be said to comprint the atlas, meaning they are sharing in the printing process and the associated costs and profits.

• Example 3 (Modern Misapplication): A contemporary historian researching early copyright law might encounter the term "comprint" in an old text and mistakenly conclude it was the historical legal term for what we now call digital piracy or illegal file-sharing of copyrighted material. They might then write an article discussing how "comprinting" was the 18th-century equivalent of unauthorized online distribution. This would be a misinterpretation, as "comprint" was never a recognized legal offense for unauthorized copying, either in its historical context or when conceptually applied to modern issues.