# Primary Sources on Copyright - Record Viewer
Supreme Court on Originality , Madrid (1861)

Source: Archivo del Tribunal Supremo. id. Cendoj: 28079110011861100099

Citation:
Supreme Court on Originality , Madrid (1861), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org

Back | Record | Images | No Commentaries
Translation only | Transcription only | Show all | Bundled images as pdf
            Chapter 1 Page 5 of 8 total



      which belonged to him and consequently he committed
      a true plagiarism, included in the provisions of the
      aforementioned Act and he should be punished for it:
      
            Considering,that even if the aforementioned law
      is applicable to the matter from such point of view,
      it would be necessary for this alleged plagiarism to exist that
      the idea or method that Hurtado published as the original,
      had been the same in concept as before, and prior to the legal
      requirements for Pujals to acquire ownership, and that no one else
      before him had published it:
      
            Considering that three experts, two of them appointed
      by the appellant, and whose scientific appraisal was requested
      for submission at this point of the debate, they were asked
      questions raised by him, besides declaring that the development
      of his thoughts there is a substantial difference throughout each of
      them.
      



    


            tilla, cuya propiedad le estaba declarada, y que por con-
            consiguiente habia cometido un verdadero plagio, com-
            prendido en las prescripciones de dicha ley y penado por
            ella:
                  Considerando que aun cuando pudiera ser apli-
            cable la referida ley á la cuestion mirada bajo el pun-
            to de vista que se acaba de enunciar, seria necesario
            para que existiese el plagio que se supone, que la idea
            ó método publicado, como original, por Hurtado, lo
            hubiese sido en igual concepto con anterioridad, y pre-
            vio los requisitos legales para adquirir su propiedad,
            por Pujals, y que ningun otro antes que el le hubiera
            dado á conocer:
            
                  Considerando que tres peritos, dos de ellos nombra-
            dos por parte del recurrente, y á cuya apreciación cien-
            tifica pidió que se sometiese el punto á que se hallaba
            reducido el debate, contestando á las preguntas formula-
            das por el mismo, además de declarar que en la marcha
            que cada uno há seguido en el desarrollo de su pensa-
            miento hay notable diferencia, manifestaron que en

    

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).

You may not publish these documents 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