The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1842-01-30

nascrpt in the author And as clearly follows that
this right may be retained exclusively or modified
Thus the present case the absolute property OF the
complainant in the notes taken by the defendant was so
private purpose probably for private diffusion express
prohibiting sale for profit upon the case made by the
bill and necessarily excluding from the superstition
an employ TO take notes for publication BY
be absurd say that party employed for the very pur
pose OF enabling an author publish could defeat that
purpose by nst publishing himself An obligation ne
The property of the complainant in the notes was
is instance Of different rights particular distinct
interests IN the same SUBJECT adveted by Mr.. Justice
So in the late Of soeet sAa March ~ is.o,
had agreed with Mefss Neville Manning that the iss
ter should report argued and determined In the
Kings Bench for certain compensation. The deiend-
ant published in periodical OF the cases 80 report
ed and published by the plaintiff in Navile and Man
nings reports. An injunction sustained The Vice
chancellor said there was nothing but eaus Bile CO.
wright no legal copyright vestedas that could only
be as to what in existence The notes OF Reporters
ants under their agreement with Neville and Manning
was perfect in the manuscript notes which they 70
FURNISH The plaintiff had in fact part or agency in
the immediate formation Of that manuscript.
These views sufficient to decide the case unon ito
merts whether in the absence Of express Contract
there implied agreement ON the mart of student,
and others admitted to professors lecture not 10 publsh
then Is question which am not called TO decide
mere - the express deliberate decision Of Lord Eldon
that such an implied contract an IN al
1y Pnpi or stranger will be enjoned (Abernethy vs.
1852 lie stated after much and repeated dis sson that
ne was clearly Of opinion, that when persons were ad
mitted as pupils otherwise to hear lectures althoush
orally delivered and although the parties might NM
down the whole them in hand ct they Gould do
that only for the purposes their own Information ana
could publish profit that which thev had 90, oh
tanned the right Of selling. M ''' w
An error seems to have prevailed In the
meoica profession as to the decision in this case The
injunction actually issued after Lord Eldon had express
ca ms opinion as above stated e Law Journal 2Oa This
f,opt ba I
that in November motion was made 70 dissolve The
Injunction And MIR. Horn stated that he as given to
nndeIstahd that no opposition intended. The in
junction was dissolved Of course (voL g. s5s There
from this no reason to suppose any change in Lord
II may be remarked upon this subject Of an implied
contract tha the ordinary rule Of law it only
debt perform duty without an express stipua
nom ina. Is entirely in the power Of every Lecturer
lures, that notes shall be printed or Circulated for
prom. TINS strongly put by Lord Edon. Again, the
ton the parties The Lecturer undonbteSir nus,haa
ms Lectures to certain extent when he ui.ers them
IN the absence Of authority might well be questioned
whether, when there is not an announcement OF
an intent to publish implied contract necessarily
arises Suppose an author publishes without resortin
to the act Of Congress to protect him his right it Is
admitted, is gone-the whole property is given 10 the
public The lmited publication il the lecture room, in
the notes Of Students without stipulation or restriction
may, perhaps, be equivalent. The decision Of Lord
Eldon is too late to be Of binding authority But admit
ng as controlling force, the question Of jurisdiction
By the act Of Congress of $780, any person who should
print publish any manuscript without the consent Of
the au'hor or owner made liable on the
case ava ga 'A'
This provision was enacted by the State of New YORK;
IN the year 1885, in the same language II in the
statute Of Anne, and adoption into statute of
me Engnsh common law doctrine The act of Congress
VI rep. 8, 1851 provides that any who shall
print or publish any manuscript whatever without the
consent Of the suthor or legal proprietor obtained
the United States resident therein shall be Liable 10
suffer or pay TO the author proprietor all damages
action the case founded upon this ae in any sou
having cognzance thereo the several courts Of the
the violation Of the rights authors and entors
were thereby empowered to grant njunctions in like
such publication Of any msnnscrpt a. Aforesaid
And by the act Of 10th February, 1872 CHI 30, il is
provided that the Circuit Courts Of the United States
snaii nave original cognizance well in equity
law OF all actions, suits controversies and arising
under any law ofths United States granting confirm
ing to authors or inventors to the exclusive tight their
respective writings, Inventions and discoveries. And
upon any bill in equity filed by any party aggrieved in
any such case, shall have authority gran,
according to the and principle equity to pre-
vent the violation OF hts Of authors inventors
Thus Congress has fully exercised lis power under
the TO promote science and the has
Their not superseded he power ofhe to ie
gisate has been disputed1john Rep 6s7-story the
Constitution, 50-ad Ken,s Commenarie 1897 AT any
rate there has been attempt Of the kind in our State
upon this particular subject.
The material qsesfon under these acts Of Congress
feet in the United States Courts, and if whether -
not exclusively there.
not in taking down the words Of lecturer That
pro ded for by the contract ITSELF And by the contract
Or 70 s.
for profits qualified rsh. in the defendant 70 use for
his own nruction possibly to communicate to others
Tor perusa certainly not to print or publish it.
hs is so, the complainant in truth the oSthor Of
the manuscript, though manuay written by another.
II this could admit Of doubt, yet questionably Il
he was the legal proprietor, far any printing
cerned. And then such printing or publishing is
plainly within the ninth section Of the act Of 1881 and
the remedy BY action or Injunction may be had under
Circuit Court Of the United States But suppose the
Complainant to be entitled this BILL fl amsd TO pre-
sent the question, as agreement was set FORTH but
barely that the Defendant having the privilege of add
mission, was present lean no such difference The
foundation Of the right to ask injunction would then
be this,hat there implied agreement that her
notes taken by the hearer should not be published for
in such purpose And then such property
and right rests solely with the lecturer. In this view
the legal proprietor all such interest in right to it,
The implied contract presents the question in the snme
mind to separate the OF property from the ques-
ion Of trust. On the right Of operty, exclusive or
qualified sprirg ngf ON express stipulation, gal i'm
Of trust in relation to the subject without eonnec
ton with the RICH. Of property do not unaersanS
granted injunction 10 stay the public alton Of Lord
Clarendons History, where L had been loanea TO make
AID he observedt could not be presumed he meant to
give the privilege Of multiplying in print a. Eden
800 follows that upon the ground Of belief taken In
the BILL there jurisdiction in the Courts Of the United
States and my opinion that jurisdiction exclusive
Of consequences also, upon this point TO recoec.
that the decision of the House OF Lords that the sta
tute of Ann had superseded the law right The
States have yielded to Congress the power TO laws
for the protection Of authors in order that such laws
may be uniform and efficient throughout the whole
country. II such law has been passed meeting the
given and acting upon H. II must, should with de
ference think supercede all State Legislation, but
tanly would supercede common law remedies. Then
the present case arising under the laws and const
ton othe United States and then the reasoning of the
Court ia Martin Hunter Il Wheaton, 5s7, and Cohens
vs. Pgnia 6Wheaton ABB appears strongly to sustain
the xcusveness Of the Jurisdiction II 20 be the
true conclusion that the judicial power conferr HAN