Burnet v. Chetwood, London (1721)

Source: Lincolns Inn Library: Merivale, J.H., Chancery Reports, 3 Vols. (London: Butterworth, 1817-1819), 2: 441

Citation:
Burnet v. Chetwood, London (1721), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Record-ID: uk_1721

Permanent link: http://www.copyrighthistory.org/record/uk_1721

Full title:
Burnet v. Chetwood (1721) 2 Mer. 441

Full title original language:
N/A

Abstract:
Drawing upon material in the National Archives the commentary explores the background to and substance of the decision as well as its relationship with current judicial practices in refusing the court's protection to copyright protected materials on the grounds that the content of the work is, for example, obscene, sexually immoral, defamatory, blasphemous or irreligious.

1 Commentary:
commentary_uk_1721

Bibliography:
  • Saunders, D., 'Copyright, Obscenity and Literary History', Journal of English Literary History, 57 (1990): 431-44

  • Deazley, R., On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth Century Britain (1695-1775) (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004)


Related documents in this database:
1721: Burnet's Bill of Complaint and Chetwood's Answer
1721: Burnet v. Chetwood: Entries from the Court's Book of Orders

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1721

Location: London

Language: English

Source: Lincolns Inn Library: Merivale, J.H., Chancery Reports, 3 Vols. (London: Butterworth, 1817-1819), 2: 441

Persons referred to:
Blount, Charles
Burnet, Dr. Thomas
Chetwood, William
Kettleby, Walter
Parker, Thomas
Roussillion, Gabriel
Wilkinson, Francis

Places referred to:
N/A

Cases referred to:
Burnet v. Chetwood (1721) 2 Mer. 441

Institutions referred to:
Fleet Prison, London
Stationers' Company

Legislation:
Statute of Anne, 1710, 8 Anne, c.19

Keywords:
authorship, theory of
derivatives
immoral works
moral rights, integrity
translation, right of
translations, of contemporary works
unpublished works

Responsible editor: Ronan Deazley


Our Partners


Copyright statement

You may copy and distribute the translations and commentaries in this resource, or parts of such translations and commentaries, in any medium, for non-commercial purposes as long as the authorship of the commentaries and translations is acknowledged, and you indicate the source as Bently & Kretschmer (eds), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900) (www.copyrighthistory.org).

You may not publish these documents for any commercial purposes, including charging a fee for providing access to these documents via a network. This licence does not affect your statutory rights of fair dealing.

Although the original documents in this database are in the public domain, we are unable to grant you the right to reproduce or duplicate some of these documents in so far as the images or scans are protected by copyright or we have only been able to reproduce them here by giving contractual undertakings. For the status of any particular images, please consult the information relating to copyright in the bibliographic records.


Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, 10 West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DZ, UK