AN INJUNCTION GRANTED

Hokitika Guardian, 28 April 1931, Page 5

AN INJUNCTION GRANTED

COPYRIGHT CASE, INFORMATION IN A ROAB GUIDE. “Even errors have been copied with* out correction,” said Mr Justice Adams in the Supreme Court, Christchurch, on Friday in giving his reserved judgment in the action for breach of copyright, which was heard the previous dav.

Andrews, Baty arid Company, Ltd., printers and publishers, producers of “The New Zealand Motorists’ Road Guide, South Island,” alleged, that Mann, Mason and Company had tafeen information direct from that publication, and used it in their own publicaton, “How to Get There.” Plaintiff company alleged that the tables and chart m “How to Get There,” were substantially a reproduction of those in “The New Zealand Motorists’ Road Guide, South Island.”

The plaintiff claimed £250 damages, an order for the delivery to plaintiff of all copies in the possession of the defendant from a continuation of any such infringement, the costs of the action, and such other relief as the Court might deem just.

The statement of defence denied the copyright of the plaintiff’s publication and denied that the information in that publication had been reproduced by defendant.

Mr K- M. Gresson appeared for plaintiff and Mr A. T. Donnelly for defendant.

“There is no room for doubt in this case.” said his Honour, in giving judgment. “The evidence of Mr Beale that with few exceptions the defendant has copied into his pubication the whole •if the table of distances published by the plaintiff, and that this was done without independent measurements oi compilation, is shown by the fact that even errors in the table have been copied without correction. This obviously could not have happened if the information forming the basis of defendant’s work bad been obtained m the way suggested by the defendant, Mr Vernasoni. Moreover, Mr Vernasoni’s evidence as to the sources from which the information ns to the distances given in the defendant’s table was obtained was largely discounted by bis own evidence on cross-examination. “I agree with Mr Gresson that if the defendant’s compilation had been made as Mr Vernasoni says it would have been impossible for the errors made to have been copied without correction-. I find, therefore, that defendant has infringed the plaintiff’s copyright. The plaintiff is entitled to the injunction set out in the claim for Judgment.

“There is no evidence however, to support the claim for damages. It appears that the defendant’s publication is quite recent. Defendant musv pay the costs of the action as on a claim for £200.”