Cannabis Ruderalis

How this document has been cited

Rather, bankruptcy courts and courts of equity have the power to order assignment of legal title from the original owner to the receiver or trustee according to the requirements of the patent statutes, thus vesting the receiver or trustee with the right to bring suit for infringement. Id
- in Morrow v. Microsoft Corp., 2007 and 18 similar citations
—approving of the court compelling the transfer and sale of a copyright in order to apply the proceeds to the payment of a judgment debt
- in Sprinkler Warehouse v. SYSTEMATIC RAIN, 2015 and 16 similar citations
The right of property in the physical substance, which is the fruit of the discovery, is altogether distinct from the right in the discovery itself, just as the property in the instruments or plate by which copies of a map are multiplied is distinct from the copyright of the map itself.
- in Patterson v. Kentucky, 1879 and 20 similar citations
—copyright "is not the subject of seizure or sale by means of" an execution, but it "may be reached by a creditor's bill
—it was held, where the copyright for a map had been taken out under the act of Congress, a sale upon execution of the copperplate engraving from which it was made did not pass the right to print and sell copies of the map.
- in American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister, 1907 and 18 similar citations
—it: "The copperplate engraving, like any other tangible personal property, is the subject of seizure and sale, on execution, and the title passes to the purchaser, the same as if made at a private sale. But the incorporeal right, secured by the statute to the author, to multiply copies of the map, by the use of the plate, being intangible, and resting altogether in grant, is not the …
There is no question but that it is a different and independent right from the usual right of ownership of an article of personal property.
Copyright is an exclusive right to the multiplication of copies, for the benefit of the author or his assigns, disconnected from the plate, or any other physical existence.
He then cited the cases in Johnson's and Paige's Reports, above referred to, and added: "But in case of such remedy, we suppose, it would be necessary for the court to compel a transfer to the purchaser, in conformity with the requirements of the copyright act, in order to vest him with a complete title to the property."
- in Ager v. Murray, 1882 and 11 similar citations
—the right to reproduce "will not pass with the manuscript unless included by express words in the transfer."

Cited by

909 NE 2d 671 - Ohio: Court of Appeals, 10th Appellate Dist. 2009
105 US 126 - Supreme Court 1882
57 Cal. 2d 684 - Cal: Supreme Court 1962
109 F. Supp. 330 - Dist. Court, SD New York 1952
97 F. Supp. 360 - Dist. Court, SD California 1951
Dist. Court, ND Oklahoma 2014
Dist. Court, ND Oklahoma 2014
62 F. Supp. 3d 1261 - Dist. Court, ND Oklahoma 2014
Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2007
499 F. 3d 1332 - Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2007

Leave a Reply