Evening journal., 1895-06-12
WHO OWNS THE COPYRIGHT?
The Question which Judge wales VIII
Have to Take Into Confederation in the
Costa Barry Case.

The Question which Judge wales VIII
Have to Take Into Consideration In the
Oosta-Barry Case.
The Costa Barry directory war was
brought up again in United States Court
this morning. George A Bates repre-
sented Costa in the suit FOR preliminary
injunction preventing Homer Bacry from
publishing or selling directory which be
claims is an infringement Of the copyright
owned by William Costa and assigned to
his wife
An amended bill Of complaint was filed
BY Mr.. Bates, changing in several i'm
material points. Also stiidavits from
Mir. Costa TO the effect that B f..
Bartram had loaned Costa So 80 for
the purpose of getting o1t the 1894
directory. under condition that the
money should be returned together
with certain amount Of the profits Ia
August 1894 this was done, Bartram held
the copyright as security Afterwards
bartram made demand FOR part of
profits he claimed had been made on the
state directory and on being told that
there were no profits, threatened to sell
the copyright TO Barry.
Mr. Bates also submitted affldavits Of
Mary !. Heath detailing errors claimed to
have been copied from Costa's directory
Of 1894 and to be found Ia Barry's Of
1855. He asked that preliminary
injunction be granted. Then If suit be
brought TO dissolve this, further arcu-
ment could be made.
Mr. Hillss argued that the copy right'for
the 1894 directory had never been ownsd
by Mary A. Costa, as the law had not
been complied with, the copies required
by law not having been fled with the
librarian Of Congress That the directory
was on the market May 25, 1894 and the
books were not deposited until the latter
part Of July consequently no copyright
could have existed. That there can be
no possibility for the books to be DELAYED
two months by mail
Mr. Hilles said that Mr.. Barry.
although he knew that Costa's directorg
was not copyrighted was not disposed
to avail himself Of the work done by
Costa, but at large expense made 4
thorough and distinct canvass OF the
city himself The assignment ol
the copyright to B4rtram was
made February 70, 1894 and nc
reassignment was made to NJ. A. Costa
snd in consequence q later assignment
made by M. a. Costa was invalid. That
| Bartram was the owner Of the copyright.
II any existed, and had the right ia
assign it to Barry, which he did May 28
| 1890 BE asked that the prayer Of the
plaintiffs be refused.
Mr. Bates claimed that the Law govern.
i ing copyrights had been complied with Ii
the matter OF the 1894 directory. and the
books were filed in the required time
That there is clearly an infringement 81
the directory Of 1898 as well as that 81
| 1894 This last statement was not
allowed. however
Mr.. Bates claimed that the assignment
to Bartram was made az security FOR 4
loan. That this loan Was satisfied a.
shown by an account in Bgrtrams owr
writing, and that Bartram had not an,
right TO assign the copyright to BarrI
after the suit began Hs further claimed
that under the statute the assignment
OF a copyright must be recorded with tb.
librarian OF Congress. That Bartran
brought the assignment to Costa anc
wanted to sell il, bvt failing to do 8,
went to Barry and disposed OF it.
He didn't get any money from us,
remarked Mr.. Hilles, and Mr. Bates re.
torted that the defendants sttorne,
knew the lack of value OF such papers
Judge Wales took the papers aud ad.
i journed court until tomorrow morninI
at 10 o'clock.