PRIMARY SOURCES

ON COPYRIGHT

(1450-1900)

Burrow-Giles' Brief, Washington D.C. (1883)

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library

Citation:
Burrow-Giles' Brief, Washington D.C. (1883), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Record-ID: us_1883b

Permanent link: https://copyrighthistory.org/cam/tools/request/showRecord.php?id=record_us_1883b

Full title:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, Brief for Plaintiff in error

Full title original language:
N/A

Abstract:
Burrow-Giles' brief submitted to the Supreme Court in the case of Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony.

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: Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony
1883: Sarony's Brief

Author: N/A

Publisher: N/A

Year: 1883

Location: Washington D.C.

Language: English

Source: The University of Texas Tarlton Law Library

Persons referred to:
Agnew, Daniel
Blatchford, Samuel
Bowen, Charles Synge Christopher
Brett, William Baliol, 1st Viscount Esher
Calman, David
Madison, James
Malins, Sir Richard
Miller, Samuel Freeman
Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth
Sarony, Napoleon
Shipman, Nathaniel
Webster, Noah
Wilde, Oscar Fingall O'Flahertie Wills
Woodruff, George

Places referred to:
Connecticut
England
Massachusetts
New York
Virginia
Washington

Cases referred to:
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1883)
Daly v. Palmer, 6 F. Cas. 1132 (C.C.S.D.N.Y. 1868)
Emerson v. Davies (1845), 3 St. Rep. 780
Jollie v. Jacques, New York Distr. Ct (1850)
Nottage v. Jackson, 11 Q.B.D. 627 (1883)
Rock v. Lazarus (1872), L. R. 15 Eq. 104
Trade Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82 (1879)
Wood v. Abbott, 5 Blatchf. 325 (S.D. N.Y. 1866)

Institutions referred to:
Constitutional Convention (1787)
Court of Chancery, England
Library of Congress
Stationers' Company
U.S. Congress
U.S. Supreme Court
University of Cambridge
University of Oxford

Legislation:
Connecticut Copyright Statute 1783
Licensing Act, 1662, 13 & 14 Car.II, c.33
Massachusetts Copyright Statute 1783
New York Copyright Statute 1786
Statute of Anne, 1710, 8 Anne, c.19
U.S. Constitutional Copyright Clause 1789
U.S. Copyright Act 1790, 1 Stat. 124 (1790)
U.S. Copyright Act 1831, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., 4 Stat. 436
U.S. Copyright Amendment Act 1865 (extending copyright to photographs), 13 Stat. 540, c.126
Virginia Copyright Statute 1785

Keywords:
art market
authorship, legal concept of
authorship, theory of
constitution, US
creativity
formalities
idea/expression
inventions
labour theory
learning, the advancement of
novelty
originality
patents, for invention
personality theory
photography, protected subject matter
piracy
portrait
registration
states, US

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