Sarony's Brief, Washington D.C. (1883)

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library

Sarony's Brief, Washington D.C. (1883), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer,

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Record-ID: us_1883a

Permanent link:

Full title:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, Brief for defendant in error

Full title original language:

Sarony's brief submitted to the Supreme Court in the case of Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony.

Commentary: No commentaries for this record.

  • 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:
1862: Court of Cassation on photography
1882: Oscar Wilde photograph
1883: Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony
1883: Burrow-Giles' Brief

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1883

Location: Washington D.C.

Language: English

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library

Persons referred to:
Blatchford, Samuel
Chatterton, Thomas
Church, Frederick Edwin
Cooley, Thomas McIntyre
Giotto di Bondone
Gurlitz, Augustus T.
Hugo, Victor
Kaulbach, Wilhelm von
Macaulay, Thomas Babington
Madison, James
Marshall, John
Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth
Powers, Hiram
Reynolds, Sir Joshua
Richmond, Sir William Blake
Sarony, Napoleon
Shakespeare, William
Shipman, Nathaniel
Story, Joseph
Taney, Roger Brooke
Webster, Noah
Wilde, Oscar Fingall O'Flahertie Wills

Places referred to:
New York

Cases referred to:
Binns v. Woodruff (1821)
Bonner v. Field (1778)
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883)
Daly v. Palmer, 6 F. Cas. 1132 (C.C.S.D.N.Y. 1868)
Gibbons v. Ogden 22 U.S. 1 (1824)
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816)
Newton v. Cowie (1822) 4 Bing 234
Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. 213 (1827)
Parton v. Prang, 3 Cliff. 537 (C. C. D. Mass. 1872)
Prince Albert v. Strange (1849), 1 Hall & T., 18 L.J. Ch. 120
Rock v. Lazarus (1872), L. R. 15 Eq. 104
Thompson v. Symonds (1792), 5 T.R. 41
Turner v Robinson (1833) 5 B & Ad 789
Wood v. Abbott, 5 Blatchf. 325 (S.D. N.Y. 1866)

Institutions referred to:
Court of Chancery, England
Harper & Brothers, American publishing firm (est.1833)
Library of Congress
Patent Office, U.S. Department of State
U.S. Congress
U.S. Supreme Court

Engravers' Copyright Act, 1735, 8 Geo.II, c.13
U.S. Constitutional Copyright Clause 1789
U.S. Copyright Act 1831, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., 4 Stat. 436

authorship, theory of
constitution, US
labour theory
patents, for invention
personality theory
photography, protected subject matter
property analogies
property theory, authors' property

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) (

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) is co-published by Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, 10 West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DZ, UK and CREATe, School of Law, University of Glasgow, 10 The Square, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK