Vernon v. Sam S. & Lee Shubert, Inc.
| Decision Date | 08 February 1915 |
| Citation | 220 F. 694 |
| Parties | VERNON v. SAM S. & LEE SHUBERT, Inc., et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Benjamin Shepard, Houghton & Taylor, of New York City (Harry W. Mack of New York City, of counsel), for complainant.
Max D Steuer and William Klein, both of New York City, for defendants.
Plaintiff who is engaged in a mercantile business, wrote a play called 'Threads of Destiny.' His first version was copyrighted on September 9, 1911. On March 22, 1912, a second version was copyrighted, which did not differ from the first in any substantial respects, but which contained some additions and rephrasing.
Plaintiff claims that his copyright has been infringed by a play called 'At Bay,' which was not copyrighted until May 12, 1913. The latter play was the result of the joint labor of Mr. Scarborough and Mr. Augustus Thomas. Mr. Scarborough had been in the employ of the Department of Justice and was familiar with the so-called secret service of the United States. It was quite natural, therefore, that if he tried his hand at playwriting his efforts would be along the line of his own information or experience. This was practically Mr. Scarborough's first play, but nevertheless he hit upon an ingenious situation, which to the experienced playwright would suggest valuable dramatic possibilities. That situation was the touching off of a flashlight by a dying man in order to obtain the photograph of the woman who had killed him and in the surroundings where the act had been done. There is no doubt whatever that Mr. Scarborough did his original work independently, and never at any time had read nor heard of the 'Threads of Destiny.' Mr. Scarborough's early draft was called 'The City of Indiscretion,' and was copyrighted on February 8, 1912.
Through Mr. Andrew Mack, an actor who was a friend of Mr. Scarborough, Mr. Augustus Thomas was prevailed upon to read Scarborough's play. Mr. Thomas is a playwright of ripe experience, who has written fully half a hundred plays to which he has signed his name, and, in addition, has collaborated with others from time to time; his practice in collaborations being not to attach his name to the play. By virtue of his skill and training, Mr. Thomas, of course, would be likely to see in what directions an idea or a situation basicly clever or useful could be practically worked out for the ultimate result of a stage production. Mr. Thomas has testified that he never knew nor heard of Mr. Vernon, nor the 'Threads of Destiny,' prior to the time that 'At Bay' was completed.
As the result of conferences and discussions between Mr. Scarborough and Mr. Thomas, Mr. Scarborough's first act was retained and was made the second act of 'At Bay.' Mr. Scarborough wrote Act I, and Mr. Thomas wrote Acts III and IV; all of the new or revised work being done in accordance with a plan agreed on after joint consideration. Much of the 'City of Indiscretion' was abandoned, and it is urged that there are striking similarities between 'Threads of Destiny' and 'At Bay.' I have no doubt that 'At Bay' was the result of the independent effort of Mr. Scarborough and Mr. Thomas, precisely as they have testified.
What...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Teich v. General Mills, Inc.
...Wilkie v. Santly Bros., 2 Cir., 91 F.2d 978, 979; Smith v. Berlin, 207 Misc. 862, 141 N.Y.S.2d 110, 114-115; Vernon v. Sam S. & Lee Shubert, D.C.N.Y., 220 F. 694, 695-696; Bachman v. Belasco, 2 Cir., 224 F. 817, 818; Walling v. American Rolbal Corporation, 2 Cir., 135 F.2d In the instant ca......
-
Dieckhaus v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation
...quality nor merit is a pre-requisite for obtaining the protection of literary property accorded by the law. Vernon v. Sam S. & Lee Shubert, Inc., D.C., 220 F. 694, 696. If the novel "Love Girl" is plaintiff's work (and we find that it is), then she is entitled to the protection of her right......
-
Fred Fisher, Inc., v. Dillingham
... ... 227; Stevenson v. Harris (D.C.) 238 F ... 432; Bachman v. Belasco, 224 F. 817, 140 C.C.A. 263; ... Haas v. Feist (D.C.) 234 F. 105; Vernon v ... Shubert (D.C.) 220 F. 694; Howell v. Miller, 91 ... F. 129, 33 C.C.A. 407; Simms v. Stanton (D.C.) 75 F ... 6; Burnell v. Chown (C.C.) 69 ... ...
-
Echevarria v. Warner Bros. Pictures
...of similar phraseology, when the theory of the two plays is entirely different, there is no infringement. Vernon v. Sam S. & Lee Shubert, Inc. (D. C. N. Y. 1915) 220 F. 694. The connection between the two works must be obvious to the ordinary reader or observer. Bachman v. Belasco (C. C. A.......