Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
| Citation | Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, 139 F. 155 (S.D. N.Y. 1905) |
| Decision Date | 11 July 1905 |
| Parties | BOBBS-MERRILL CO. v. STRAUS et al. |
Boardman Platt & Soley (W. H. H. Miller, Albert B. Boardman, and Henry W. Clark, of counsel), for complainant.
Spiegelberg & Wise (John G. Carlisle and Edmond E. Wise, of counsel), for defendants.
Suit to enjoin the sale at retail of books containing a copyright novel, 'The Castaway,' at a price less than $1 for each copy of the book. Such sales of such book are alleged to be in violation of the terms of a notice printed in each copy thereof upon the page immediately following the title-page and immediately below the statutory copyright notice. Defendants insist that the books containing such novel have been lawfully printed for sale to the general public, and to be read by the general public, and put upon the market and sold, and that the right of the owners of such books to sell same at such price as they severally may see fit to ask cannot be and is not limited or affected by the notice. They also insist that this suit is to enforce an unlawful combination and agreement, and press other defenses.
RAY District Judge (after stating the facts as above).
The main facts in this case are not disputed. They may be stated as follows:
(1) The Bobbs-Merrill Company, the complainant, is, and at all times mentioned in the bill of complainant was, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Indiana, engaged in the business of publishing and selling books, and having its principal office in the city of Indianapolis, in the state of Indiana.
(2) The complainant is, and at all times mentioned in the bill of complainant was, the owner and proprietor of a book or novel in one volume, entitled 'The Castaway,' written by Hallie Erminie Rives.
(3) The allegations contained in paragraphs of the bill of complaint numbered III to VI, inclusive, relating to the complainant's compliance with the copyright laws of the United States, are true. Such paragraphs read as follows:
(4) No copies of 'The Castaway' were sold or otherwise issued prior to securing the copyright thereon.
(5) Each and every copy of 'The Castaway' printed, published, or issued by complainant contained at the time of such publication and issue the following notice, printed upon the page of the book immediately following the title-page, and just below the statutory copyright notice:
'The price of this book at retail is one dollar net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price, and a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright.
The Bobbs-Merrill Company.' (6) The defendants in the course of their business procured copies of said hook before the commencement of this suit for the purpose of sale at retail. The defendants purchased 90 per cent. of said copies from dealers at wholesale at a reduction from said specified retail price of about 40 per cent., and 10 per cent. of said copies they purchased at retail, paying the full retail price therefor.
(7) Defendants at the time of their purchase of copies of said book knew that said book was a copyright book, and were familiar with the terms of the notice printed in each copy thereof, as described in paragraph 5 of this statement, and knew that this notice was printed in every copy of said book purchased by them.
(8) The wholesale dealers, from whom defendants purchased copies of said book, obtained the same either directly from the complainant or from other wholesale dealers at a discount from the net retail price, and at the time of their purchase knew that said book was a copyright book, and were familiar with the terms of the notice printed in each copy thereof, as described in paragraph 5 of this statement, and such knowledge was in all wholesale dealers through whom the books passed from the complainant to defendants. But said wholesale dealers were under no agreement or obligation to enforce the observance of the terms of said notice by retail dealers or to restrict their sales to retail dealers who would agree to observe said terms.
(9) The defendants have sold copies of said book at retail at the uniform price of 89 cents a copy, and are still selling, exposing for sale, and offering copies of said book at retail at said price of 89 cents per copy, without the consent of the complainant.
(10) That during the year 1900 a large number of publishers in the state of New York and throughout the states of the United States entered into an agreement for the purpose of maintaining the net retail price of copyrighted books published by any of them as designated by the publisher of each book, and to prevent the sale at retail of any such copyrighted books by any dealer at retail at less than said fixed net retail price. That pursuant to that agreement a membership corporation was formed under the laws of the state of New York under the name of the 'American Publishers' Association,' which included among its members the complainant herein and a large majority of the publishers of all books, copyrighted or uncopyrighted, in the state of New York and throughout the United States.
(11) That immediately after the incorporation of said American Publishers' Association a resolution was adopted and its members entered into agreements with each other and with the American Publishers' Association, a copy of which is as follows:
Exhibit A.
Association, 156 Fifth Avenue, New York.
Association held February 13, 1901:
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
...be little doubt that the books at issue in Bobbs–Merrill were published and first sold in the United States. See Bobbs–Merrill Co. v. Straus, 139 F. 155, 157 (C.C.S.D.N.Y.1905) (the publisher claiming copyright infringement in Bobbs–Merrill was incorporated and had its principal office in I......
-
United Shoe MaChinery Co. v. La Chapelle
... ... v. Hench (C ... C.) 84 F. 226; U.S. v. Addystone Pipe & Steel Co., 85 F. 271, ... 291, 29 C. C. A. 141, 160, 46 L. R. A. 122; Bobbs-Merrill Co ... v. Strauss (C. C.) 139 F. 155; Indiana Mfg. Co. v. J. I. Case ... Threshing Machine Co. (C. C.) 148 F. 21, 28; Blount Mfg. Co ... v. Yale ... ...
-
State v. Duluth Board of Trade
... ... by means of rewards and punishments, to sell at the prices so ... fixed. Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (C.C.) 139 F ... 155. See Scribner v. Straus (C.C.) 139 F. 193 ... A ... contract or agreement whereby a ... ...
-
Johnson v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.
...dealing with the exhibitor. See United States v. Schrader's Son, Inc., 252 U.S. 85, 99, 40 S.Ct. 251, 64 L.Ed. 471; Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (C.C.) 139 F. 155, 191. The contracts with these distributors contemplated and provided for transactions in interstate commerce. The business which......