Goes Lithographing Co. v. Apt Lithographic Co.

Decision Date16 April 1936
Citation14 F. Supp. 620
PartiesGOES LITHOGRAPHING CO. v. APT LITHOGRAPHIC CO., Inc., et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

Baar, Bennett & Fullen, of New York City (Emil N. Baar and David E. Winer, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Joel B. Liberman, of New York City (John M. Cole, of New York City, of counsel), for defendants.

PATTERSON, District Judge.

The suit is for infringement of copyright. The plaintiff moved for preliminary injunction, and the defendant responded with a motion to dismiss the bill as insufficient on its face.

The bill alleges that the plaintiff is proprietor of a copyrighted picture entitled "Found," having acquired copyright by the publication with notice of copyright and by deposit of two copies in the copyright office; that the defendants published and sold the picture without consent of the plaintiff. A copy of the picture is annexed to the bill. The only markings on it to indicate copyright are two symbols in the lower left-hand corner, too small to be made out by the naked eye with any degree of assurance. A magnifying glass, however, shows that the first is the letter C in a circle, and that the second is the letter G with L and Co within it. The second, I suppose, is a symbol suggesting Goes Lithographing Company.

Under the present Copyright Act, copyright is obtained by publication of the work with notice of copyright (section 9 17 U.S. C.A. § 9) and by deposit of two copies in the copyright office (section 12, as amended 17 U.S.C.A. § 12). The form of notice consists in general of the word "copyright" or the abbreviation "copr.," with the name of the proprietor, but it is provided that with pictures and certain other works the notice may consist of the letter C in a circle, with the initials, monogram, mark or symbol of the proprietor, the name of the proprietor in such case to appear on an accessible portion of the copies of margin, back, base, pedestal, or mounting (section 18 17 U.S.C.A. § 18).

The required notice is lacking in this case. Even if we go along with the plaintiff on the mark and initials, illegible as they are without artificial aid to the eye, there is a blank on the proprietor's name. By the statute the notice must disclose the identity of the proprietor. Fleischer Studios, Inc., v. Ralph A. Freundlich, Inc. (C.C.A.) 73 F. (2d) 276, certiorari denied 294 U.S. 717, 55 S.Ct. 516, 79 L.Ed. 1250. I agree that the statute should be applied without undue rigidity as to the proprietor's name in the notice. But the proprietor's name must be declared in some fashion,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • National Comics Publications v. Fawcett Publications
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 30 Agosto 1951
    ...v. Cohen, 3 Cir., 117 F.2d 579; Deward & Rich v. Bristol Savings & Loan Corp., supra, 4 Cir., 120 F.2d 537; Goes Lithographing Co. v. Apt. Lithographic Co., D.C., 14 F.Supp. 620; W. S. Bessett, Inc., v. Germain, D.C., 18 F. Supp. 6 Callaghan v. Myers, 128 U.S. 617, 9 S. Ct. 177, 32 L.Ed. 54......
  • National Comics Publications v. Fawcett Publications
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 10 Abril 1950
    ...is used, the letter must be distinguishable by the naked eye, unaided by the use of a magnifying glass. Goes Lithographing Co. v. Apt. Lithographing Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y., 14 F.Supp. 620; Deward & Rich v. Bristol Savings & Loan Corp., D.C. W.D.Va., 34 F.Supp. 345, affirmed 4 Cir., 120 F.2d Dete......
  • Sieff v. Continental Auto Supply
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 16 Mayo 1941
    ...it. By a publication without such notice he is presumed to waive his right and to give his work to the public. Goes Lithographing Co. v. Apt Lithographic Co. (D.C.) 14 F.Supp. 620; Thompson v. Hubbard, 131 U.S. 123, 9 S. Ct. 710, 33 L.Ed. While under Section 6, as plaintiffs contend, the or......
  • Metro Associated Services v. Webster City Graphic
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • 31 Diciembre 1953
    ...its illustrations by its subscribers constituted proper and legal notice of copyright. In the case of Goes Lithographing Co. v. Apt Lithographic Co., Inc., D.C.N.Y.1936, 14 F.Supp. 620, the situation was that the plaintiff who was the owner of a copyrighted picture entitled "Found" publishe......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT