Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and brief in support thereof (1916)

Record Details:

Title:
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and brief in support thereof
Date:
1916
Publisher:
New York : Press of Fremont Payne
Volume:
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and brief in support thereof
Leaf #:
00034
Language:
English
Collection:
Books and Government & Law
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
December 14, 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.

28 were brought to the purchaser's attention, but it is urged by the respondents and by the Courts below, that the notice itself is insufficient because in its reference to the "other terms to be fixed'' by the petitioner and to be "complied with by the user while the machine is in use," it does not set out, in detail, what those terms and conditions are. In this Court citation of authority is hardly needed for the proposition that "Whatever is notice enough to excite attention and put the party on his guard and call for inquiry is notice of everything to which •such inquiry might have led. When a person has sufficient information to lead him to a fact, he shall be deemed conversant of it." Wood vs. Carpenter, 101 U. S., 135-141. Shauer vs. Alterton, 151 U. S., 607-622. When, therefore, the purchaser of the machine in question saw from a perusal of the name plate notice that he could only use it "upon terms to be fixed by the Motion Picture Patents Company and complied with by the user while it is in use" and saw from the plate that the notice was subscribed "Motion Picture Patents Company, New York, N. Y., U. S. A.," he Avas put upon inquiry and placed under the legal obligation to seek the Motion Picture Patents Company, at the address given, and ascertain upon what terms he could laAvfully use the machine obtained by him from that company's licensee, and he cannot now be heard to say that he did not know what those terms were, when upon inquiry he could have read