Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., New York (1891)

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library Stack 216-217: Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., 48 F. 678 (S.D.N.Y. 1891).

Citation:
Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., New York (1891), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Record-ID: us_1891

Permanent link: http://www.copyrighthistory.org/record/us_1891

Full title:
Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., 48 F. 678 (S.D.N.Y. 1891)

Full title original language:
N/A

Abstract:
An early copyright in photographs case. The case upheld the copyrightability of a photograph, applying a somewhat diluted version of the Supreme Court's originality requirement for photographs announced in Lithographic Co. v. Sarony.

Commentary: No commentaries for this record.

Bibliography:
  • Panzer, Mary. Mathew Brady and the image of history. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997.

  • Farley, Christine Haight. 'Copyright Law's Response to the Invention of Photography.' 65 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 385 (2004).


Related documents in this database:
1883: Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1891

Location: New York

Language: English

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library Stack 216-217: Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., 48 F. 678 (S.D.N.Y. 1891).

Persons referred to:
Brown, Davis S.
Brown, Delaplaine
Falk, Benjamin J.
Falk, Isaac N.
Sadler, Josie

Places referred to:
New York

Cases referred to:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883)
Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co., 48 F. 678 (C.C.S.D.N.Y. 1891)

Institutions referred to:
Brett Lithographing Co., New York
New York District Court

Legislation:
N/A

Keywords:
advertising
authorship, theory of
photography, protected subject matter

Responsible editor: Oren Bracha


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