The law of motion pictures (1918)

Record Details:

Title:
The law of motion pictures
Date:
1918
Publisher:
New York : Baker, Voorhis and Company
Volume:
The law of motion pictures : including the law of the theatre
Leaf #:
000717
Language:
English
Collection:
Books and Early Cinema
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
September 21, 2023
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

RESTRAINT OF TRADE — PRICE FIXING — MONOPOLY 653 Section 185. — Co-authorship. This subject has been treated in detail in Sections 9 and 10, to which the reader is referred. Section 186. — Employer and employe. For a discussion of the rights of the above parties the reader is referred to Section 8. Section 187. — Restraint of trade — Price fixing — Monopoly. The reader is referred to Sections 133 and 134 for a detailed discussion of the law on this subject. as in the case of street parades, school, educational or similar public occasions and exhibitions. “Putting the matter another way, the contention of the defendant is that the person who becomes entitled to the copyright by complying with the act must state what was in his mind at the time that he obtained his copyright. I am unable to see any justification for this view because the purpose or mental attitude of the composer is immaterial. The procedure is that he complies with the act and as a result of that compliance certain benefits follow by virtue of the statute. “The subject could be further and somewhat elaborately developed, but I see no occasion so to do upon this motion, as the point which defendant makes will be preserved should a trial be had. Motion denied.”