Hills & Co. v. Hoover

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

Hills & Co. v. Hoover

136 F. 701, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 5176

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1905

DocketNo. 12

StatusPublished

This text of 136 F. 701 (Hills & Co. v. Hoover) 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

Hills & Co. v. Hoover, 136 F. 701, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 5176 (circtedpa 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

HOLLAND, District Judge.

I am not convinced from the evidence in this case that the copies from which defendants had their alleged infringing copies made contained the word “published” in the notice of the plaintiff’s copyright; but, even if the notice did contain the word “published,” the defendants were not misled or deceived. It was a deliberate act on their part to copy the plaintiff’s paintings, and they did it with ample and legal notice of the fact that the paintings were copyrighted by the plaintiff,

For the reasons given in the case of Hills & Co., Limited, v. Austrich (C. C.) 120 Fed. 862, a perpetual injunction and an accounting will be awarded, as prayed for.

Let a decree be drawn accordingly.

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

HOLLAND, District Judge.

I am not convinced from the evidence in this case that the copies from which defendants had their alleged infringing copies made contained the word “published” in the notice of the plaintiff’s copyright; but, even if the notice did contain the word “published,” the defendants were not misled or deceived. It was a deliberate act on their part to copy the plaintiff’s paintings, and they did it with ample and legal notice of the fact that the paintings were copyrighted by the plaintiff,

For the reasons given in the case of Hills & Co., Limited, v. Austrich (C. C.) 120 Fed. 862, a perpetual injunction and an accounting will be awarded, as prayed for.

Let a decree be drawn accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 F. 701, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 5176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hills-co-v-hoover-circtedpa-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack