Affiliations

• M. Witmark & Sons v. Calloway

  Cites Herbert v. Shanley Co. — 221 Fed. Rep. 229; 229 Fed. Rep. 340, reversed.

• Cravens v. Retail Credit Men's Ass'n

  Cites L. A. Westermann Co. v. Dispatch Printing Co. — 233 Fed. Rep. 609, reversed.

• M. Witmark & Sons v. Calloway

  District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1927-10-29 · cited 25×

  The case involved a copyright infringement claim by M. Witmark & Sons against theater owner R. M. Calloway for the unauthorized public performance of the song "Smilin’ Through" on a player piano during movie exhibitions at his for-profit theater. The court found infringement under the Copyright Act of 1909, which grants the copyright owner the exclusive right to perform the musical composition publicly for profit, and held that the theater's use of the music roll was unauthorized even though the employee acted without the owner's knowledge or instructions. It reasoned that the performance occurred in connection with paid admissions and thus qualified as a public performance for profit, warranting an injunction along with the statutory minimum damages of $250 and reasonable attorney fees.

  property

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (1,921 words)

• Cravens v. Retail Credit Men's Ass'n

  District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1924-10-29 · cited 4×

  The case involved plaintiffs Cravens and Blue Book Credit Company, who published a copyrighted annual credit rating book containing merchant reports and a compiled list of bankrupts from court records since 1898, suing defendant Retail Credit Men's Association for copyright infringement. The defendant, a competing credit reporting service, admitted copying the plaintiffs' bankrupt list verbatim into its loose-leaf binders but denied other copying. The court found infringement established only as to the admitted copying from two separate copyrighted editions and ruled that other alleged instances of copying names or ratings were not proven by a preponderance of the evidence. It awarded the statutory minimum damages of $250 for each of the two infringements plus $250 in attorney's fees, for a total judgment of $750.

  propertybusiness & regulatory

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (2,528 words)