« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
TITLE OF CASE.
(Cases printed in this volume are preceded by an asterisk.)
*Pagano v. Photo-drama Motion Picture Co. (Inc.) v. Social Uplift Film Corporation. *Do. v. Do. (C. C. A.).
Ricordi, G., & Co. v. Mason...
*Rodman Chemical Co. v. E. F. Houghton Co...
*Saalfield Pub. Co. v. Merriam..
*Standard Music Roll Co. v. F. A. Mills (Inc.).. *Star Co. v. Wheeler Syndicate (Inc.).
*Do. v. Do. (final hearing)..
*Stecher Lithograph Co. v. Dunston Lithograph
*Stern v. Carl Laemmle Music Co.. *Stevenson v. Fox.
*Stevenson v. Harris..
*Stewart v. Hudson.
Stone & McCarrick (Inc.) v. Dugan Piano Co. (Ltd.)..
*Do. v. Do. (C. C. A.);
Straus v. American Publishers' Ass'n (U. S. Supr. Ct.)...
*Strauss v. Penn Printing & Publishing Co.. *Stringer v. Frohman.
*Suburban Press v. Phila. Suburban Pub. Co..
*Taft v. Smith, Gray & Co..
Universal Film Mfg. Co. v. Bettis..
*Vernon v. Sam S. and Lee Shubert....
*Wagner v. Wilson..
*Westermann, L. A., v. Dispatch Printing Co.. *Wheeler Syndicate (Inc.) v. Star Co...............
DECISIONS OF THE COURTS INVOLVING COPYRIGHT.
EX PARTE ALLEN & CO.
[Decision of the Commissioner of Patents.]
Decided April 2, 1910.
Ea parte & Co.,
The print to be registrable must describe the article of Allen manufacture with which it is connected or which it is Apr. 2, 1910. intended to advertise (ex parte Royal Medicine Company, 100 O. G., 2775, ex parte Regina Music Box Company, 100 O. G., 1112, and ex parte The Lion Fig and Date Company, 102 O. G. 823), and the article must be separate and independent of the print itself. (Ex parte Barnhart Bros. & Spindler, 87 O. G., 2118.)
2. PRINT-REGISTRATION OF GAMBLING OR LOTTERY DEVICES.
Where the alleged print is a device employed to further a lottery scheme or game of chance, Held, that if it would not be a violation of the Federal laws respecting lotteries and similar devices for a bureau of an executive department of the United States Government to give its approval to appellant's device by registering the same it is certainly against public policy to do so.
PRINT FOR DRINKS AND CIGARS.
Mr. Russell M. Everett for the applicant.
MOORE, Commissioner. This is an appeal from the refusal of the examiner to register what is alleged to be a print.
The alleged print contains at the top thereof the following statement:
Below the above printed matter are attached 240 Page 1066. "slips." Each slip has printed upon the side which is