Bleistein's Brief, Washington D.C. (1902)

Source: University of Texas School of Law Tarlton Law Library MICROFILM CABINETS 19-21

Citation:
Bleistein's Brief, Washington D.C. (1902), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Record-ID: us_1902

Permanent link: http://www.copyrighthistory.org/record/us_1902

Full title:
Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co. United States, Brief on behalf of Plaintiff in Error

Full title original language:
N/A

Abstract:
Brief of plaintiff in error in Bleistein v. Donaldson submitted to the Supreme Court.

Commentary: No commentaries for this record.

Bibliography:
  • Zimmerman, Diane Leenheer. 'The Story of Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Company: Originality as a Vehicle for Copyright Inclusivity.' In Intellectual Property Stories, ed. Jane C. Ginsburg and Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss. New York: Foundation Press, 2006.


Related documents in this database:
1899: Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co., District Court Decision
1900: Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co., Circuit Court Decision
1902: Bleistein: Donaldson Lithographing Co. Brief
1902: Bleistein: Three Posters
1903: Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co.
1903: Bleistein: Cartoon

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1902

Location: Washington D.C.

Language: English

Source: University of Texas School of Law Tarlton Law Library MICROFILM CABINETS 19-21

Persons referred to:



Abbey, Edwin Austin
Alexandre, Arsène
Bandlow, August
Beardsley, Aubrey Vincent
Bleistein, George
Bradley, William Henry
Briesen, Arthur von
Chéret, Jules
Clermont-Ganneau, Charles Simon
Clifford, Nathan
Columbus, Christopher
Cotton, Sir Henry
Cox, Kenyon
Crane, Walter
Day, Francis
Deady, Matthew Paul
Donaldson, William M.
Drone, Eaton Sylvester
Euclid
Evans, Walter
Ffoulkes, Charles John
Grasset, Eugène Samuel
Herkomer, Sir Hubert von
Herod, the Great
Hiatt, Charles
Hogarth, William
Irving, Washington
Jefferson, Thomas
Kittredge, Edmund W.
Lacombe, Emile Henry
Lalanne, Maxine
Linton, Sir James Dromgole
Lurton, Horace Harmon
Marks, Henry Stacey
McCarter, Henry
Millais, Sir John Everett
Miller, Samuel Freeman
Penfield, Edward
Poynter, Sir Edward John
Putnam, William LeBaron
Rembrandt
Rhead, Louis John
Rudolf, John A.
Stowe, Harriet Elizabeth, née Beecher
Toulouse-Lautrec, Henri Marie Raymond de
Velasquez, Diego de Silva y
Walker, Albert Henry
Walker, Frederick
Wallace, Benjamin E.
Wallace, William James
Wilcox, Ansley
Wilde, Oscar Fingall O'Flahertie Wills
Willette, Adolphe-Léon

Places referred to:
Alexandria
Buffalo, New York
California
Covington, Kentucky
Egypt
Jerusalem
Kentucky
New York
Peru, Indiana
Washington

Cases referred to:
Black et al. v. Henry G. Allen Co. (C.C.D. NY 1889)
Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co. (C.C.D. KY. 1899)
Blume v. Spear, 30 F. 629, 631 (C.C.D. N.Y. 1887)
Bolles v. Outing Co., 175 U.S. 262 (1899)
Boucicault v. Hart, Fed. Cases, No. 1692 (1875)
Brightly v. Littleton, 37 Fed. Rep. 103 (C.C.D. Pa. 1888)
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony 111 U.S. 53 (1883)
Callaghan v. Myers, 128 US 617 (1888)
Carlisle v. Colusa County, 57 Fed. 979 (C.C.D. Cal. 1893)
Carte v. Evans, 27 F. 861 (C.C.D. Mass. 1886)
Church v. Linton, 25 Ont. Rep. 121 (Canada, 1894)
Daly v. Palmer, 6 F. Cas. 1132 (C.C.S.D.N.Y. 1868)
Drury v. Ewing (1862), 1 Bond's Rep., 540
French v. Kreling, (C.C.D. Cal., 1894)
Hegeman v. Springer, 110 F. 374 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1901)
Henderson v. Tompkins, 60 F. 758 (C.C.D. Mass. 1894)
Higgins v. Keuffel, 140 U.S. 428 (1891)
J.L. Mott Iron Works v. Clow, 82 F. 316 (7th Cir. 1897)
Lawrence v. Dana, 15 F. Cas. 26, 51 (C.C.D. Mass. 1869)
Little v. Gould (1852), 2 Blatch., 165
Marsh v. Warren, 4 Am. Law Times, N.S., 126
Martinetti v. Maguire, 16 F. Cases 920 (C.C.D.Cal. 1867)
Nottage v. Jackson, 11 Q.B.D. 627 (1883)
Palmer v. De Witt (1872) 47 N. Y. 532-536
Prince Albert v. Strange (1849), 1 Hall & T., 18 L.J. Ch. 120
Reed v. Carusi, 20 Fed. Cas., No. 11642 (1845)
Richardson v. Miller, 20 Fed. Cas. 723, No. 11,791 (C.C.D. Mass. 1877)
Rock v. Lazarus (1872), L. R. 15 Eq. 104
Scribner v. Clark, 50 F. 473 (C.C.D. Ill. 1888)
Sweet v. Benning (1855) 16 C.B. 459
Thompkins v. Halleck 133 Mass. 32 (1882)
Trade Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82 (1879)
Yuengling v. Schile, 12 F. 97 (C.C.D.N.Y. 1882)

Institutions referred to:
Charles Scribner & Co., American publishing firm
Kentucky District Court
Library of Congress
Louvre Museum
Patent Office, U.S. Department of State
U.S. Congress
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth District
U.S. Supreme Court

Legislation:
U.S. Constitutional Copyright Clause 1789
U.S. Copyright Act 1790, 1 Stat. 124 (1790)
U.S. Copyright Amendment Act 1895 (penalties for infringement of copyright in photographs and fine art), 28 Stat. 965
U.S. International Copyright Act, 1891 (Chace Act)
U.S. Print and Label Law, Amendatory Act of June 18, 1874, 18 Stat. 78

Keywords:
advertising
authorship, theory of
commissions
contract
copy
creativity
deposit
employer/employee relations
engravings, protected subject matter
formalities
immoral works
novelty
originality
ownership, corporate
penalties
photography, protected subject matter
piracy
utility

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