Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A COPYRIGHT CASE.

BIGHT OF RACK BOOKS.

(Per, Press Association.)

Wellington, last night. At the Magistrate's Court to-day (ieorge Cooksley and George Harris proceeded against Johnson and Sons, printers, for recovery of £IOO for alleged iufringmont of copyright. Plaintiffs in the month of January purchased from tho Wellington Racing Club, for £l9l, the sole liberty of printing and publishing an official card of the races to bo held at the summer meeting of the club. Defendants printed and published a book which purported to bo an official book, and was, ia fact, in its material parts, a copy of the official book, without the consent of the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs therefore sued as assignees of tho

copyright, and claimed from defendants £IOO and double costs of tho suit. Alternately they sued ao assignees of the copyright in design and printed matter of the cover of the card, which cover was in its material and details copied, printed and published by the defendants.' Plaintiffs also alternately sued defendants for that they printed an,d published a race card, which they knew plaintiffs had acquired from the racing club, for a large sum of money, the exclusive right to sell. Plaintiff's total claim was limited to £IOO, whether they recover under, all, or any of the alternate claims. j

Counsel for defendant raised a non-suit point that the copyright- bad not beon proved according to the conditions of tho sale. Thero was no exclusive right to publish. There was only tho right to print and issue the club’s correct card. There wore many dissimilarities in the two books, and there was nothing to show that tho public were deceived. Hi* Worship said ho would give judgment on this point next week,

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19050329.2.39

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1416, 29 March 1905, Page 3

Word Count
287

A COPYRIGHT CASE. Gisborne Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1416, 29 March 1905, Page 3

A COPYRIGHT CASE. Gisborne Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1416, 29 March 1905, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert