PRIMARY SOURCES

ON COPYRIGHT

(1450-1900)

Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, Napoleon Sarony (1883)

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library Stack 215: Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883).

Citation:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, Napoleon Sarony (1883), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Record-ID: us_1883

Permanent link: https://copyrighthistory.org/cam/tools/request/showRecord.php?id=record_us_1883

Full title:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53

Full title original language:
N/A

Abstract:
A Supreme Court decision on the issue of copyright protection of photographs. The decision rejected various challenged to the copyrightability of a photograph of Oscar including a claim of lack of originality based on the alleged mechanical nature of photography. While the decision rejected the originality challenge, it construed the originality requirement in broad terms that questioned the eligibility for copyright protection of many other photographic works.

Commentary: No commentaries for this record.

Bibliography:
  • Panzer, Mary. Mathew Brady and the image of history. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997.

  • Farley, Christine Haight. 'Copyright Law's Response to the Invention of Photography.' 65 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 385 (2004).


Related documents in this database:
1862: Court of Cassation on photography
1882: Oscar Wilde photograph
1883: Sarony's Brief
1883: Burrow-Giles' Brief
1891: Falk v. Brett Lithographing Co.

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1883

Location: Napoleon Sarony

Language: English

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library Stack 215: Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883).

Persons referred to:
Bouvier, John
Bowen, Charles Synge Christopher
Brett, William Baliol, 1st Viscount Esher
Calman, David
Cotton, Sir Henry
Gurlitz, Augustus T.
Mansfield, William Murray, 1st Earl
Miller, Samuel Freeman
Sarony, Napoleon
Wilde, Oscar Fingall O'Flahertie Wills

Places referred to:
Great Britain
London
New York

Cases referred to:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883)
Millar v. Taylor (1769) 4 Burr. 2303
Nottage v. Jackson, 11 Q.B.D. 627 (1883)

Institutions referred to:
Court of King's Bench
House of Lords
Library of Congress
New York District Court
U.S. Congress

Legislation:
Fine Art Copyright Act, 1862, 25 & 26 Vict., c.68
Statute of Anne, 1710, 8 Ann. c. 19
U.S. Copyright Act 1790, 1 Stat. 124 (1790)
U.S. Copyright Act 1802 (Amendment of 1790 Act), 2 Stat. 171 (1802)
U.S. Copyright Act 1831, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., 4 Stat. 436
U.S. Print and Label Law, Amendatory Act of June 18, 1874, 18 Stat. 78

Keywords:
authorship, theory of
constitution, US
creativity
idea/expression
labour theory
originality
patents, for invention
photography, protected subject matter
piracy
portrait

Responsible editor: Oren Bracha


Copyright History resource developed in partnership with:

Our Partners

Copyright statement

You may copy and distribute the translations and commentaries in this resource, or parts of such translations and commentaries, in any medium, for non-commercial purposes as long as the authorship of the commentaries and translations is acknowledged, and you indicate the source as Bently & Kretschmer (eds), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900) (www.copyrighthistory.org).

With the exception of commentaries that are available under a CC-BY licence (compliant with UKRI policy) you may not publish individual documents or parts of the database for any commercial purposes, including charging a fee for providing access to these documents via a network. This licence does not affect your statutory rights of fair dealing.

Although the original documents in this database are in the public domain, we are unable to grant you the right to reproduce or duplicate some of these documents in so far as the images or scans are protected by copyright or we have only been able to reproduce them here by giving contractual undertakings. For the status of any particular images, please consult the information relating to copyright in the bibliographic records.

Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900) is co-published by Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, 10 West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DZ, UK and CREATe, School of Law, University of Glasgow, 10 The Square, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK