Banks Law Pub. Co. v. Lawyers' Co-operative Pub. Co.
This text of 169 F. 386 (Banks Law Pub. Co. v. Lawyers' Co-operative Pub. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
It is not necessary to discuss so much of the opinion below as deals with the questions of assignment and of the right of the official reporter to secure copyrights. We concur with Judge Hazel in his reasoning and conclusion that the arrangement of reported cases in sequence, their paging and distribution into volumes, are not features of such importance as to entitle the reporter to copyright protection of such details.
The decree is affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
169 F. 386, 94 C.C.A. 642, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banks-law-pub-co-v-lawyers-co-operative-pub-co-ca2-1909.