Centennial Catalogue Co. v. Porter

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Centennial Catalogue Co. v. Porter

5 F. Cas. 356, 3 Cent. Law J. 460

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 1, 1876

StatusPublished

This text of 5 F. Cas. 356 (Centennial Catalogue Co. v. Porter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Centennial Catalogue Co. v. Porter, 5 F. Cas. 356, 3 Cent. Law J. 460 (circtedpa 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

CADWALADER, District Judge,

considered that the plaintiffs were not in a condition to make such a book as shown in the application. It was something new to him that copyright was applicable to an inchoate and intended publication. Assuming that a manuscript could be copyrighted, the question was whether it must not be in the form in which it is to be printed. The difficulty was that the plaintiffs had no copyright in the subject but only in the work. If there is anything but literary piracy, their remedy is in the state courts. There is no remedy in the United States court until it comes to infringement of literary property. The plaintiffs go upon the .ground of literary property, not in print and only partly in manuscript. The jurisdiction of the court is only over printed matter. The mere threat to print a book does not give it jurisdiction. The act says a book, not an intended book. The injunction was therefore refused.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CADWALADER, District Judge,

considered that the plaintiffs were not in a condition to make such a book as shown in the application. It was something new to him that copyright was applicable to an inchoate and intended publication. Assuming that a manuscript could be copyrighted, the question was whether it must not be in the form in which it is to be printed. The difficulty was that the plaintiffs had no copyright in the subject but only in the work. If there is anything but literary piracy, their remedy is in the state courts. There is no remedy in the United States court until it comes to infringement of literary property. The plaintiffs go upon the .ground of literary property, not in print and only partly in manuscript. The jurisdiction of the court is only over printed matter. The mere threat to print a book does not give it jurisdiction. The act says a book, not an intended book. The injunction was therefore refused.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 F. Cas. 356, 3 Cent. Law J. 460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/centennial-catalogue-co-v-porter-circtedpa-1876.