Misplaced Pages

Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co.

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources.
Find sources: "Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
1907 United States Supreme Court case
Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 30, 1907
Decided December 16, 1907
Full case nameWerckmeister v. American Tobacco Co.
Citations207 U.S. 375 (more)28 S. Ct. 124; 52 L. Ed. 254
Holding
A copyright holder is limited to one action to collect infringing copies and statutory damages because the act's remedies are penal and must be observed without construction. The United States is not required to be a party to copyright infringement litigation.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Melville Fuller
Associate Justices
John M. Harlan · David J. Brewer
Edward D. White · Rufus W. Peckham
Joseph McKenna · Oliver W. Holmes Jr.
William R. Day · William H. Moody
Case opinion
MajorityDay, joined by a unanimous court
Laws applied
Copyright Act of 1870, amendment in 1895

Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co., 207 U.S. 375 (1907), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held a copyright holder is limited to one action to collect infringing copies and statutory damages because the act's remedies are penal and must be observed without construction. Additionally, The United States is not required to be a party to copyright infringement litigation.

The Copyright Act of 1870 does not specify what sort of action a litigant must bring to remedy copyright infringement. Werckmeister won an infringement claim against American Tobacco Company and United States Marshalls collected the infringing copies from the company. Werckmeister took American Tobacco Company back to court to get the monetary damages enumerated by the Copyright Act. In the United States, a successful penal (criminal) suit may collect property and money as restitution. Because the Court determined that the infringement damages were penal, Werckmeister had the opportunity to collect the property, as they did, and the money. They were thus limited to only one action to collect both property and money, because the statute only provided for one action.

References

  1. ^ Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co., 207 U.S. 375 (1907)

External links

U.S. Supreme Court Article I case law
Enumeration Clause of Section II
Qualifications Clauses of Sections II and III
Elections Clause of Section IV
Speech or Debate Clause of Section VI
Origination Clause of Section VII
Presentment Clause of Section VII
Taxing and Spending Clause of Section VIII
Commerce Clause of Section VIII
Dormant Commerce Clause
Others
Coinage Clause of Section VIII
Legal Tender Cases
Copyright Clause of Section VIII
Copyright Act of 1790
Patent Act of 1793
Patent infringement case law
Patentability case law
Copyright Act of 1831
Copyright Act of 1870
Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890
International Copyright Act of 1891
Copyright Act of 1909
Patent misuse case law
Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
Lanham Act
Copyright Act of 1976
Other copyright cases
Other patent cases
Other trademark cases
Necessary and Proper Clause of Section VIII
Habeas corpus Suspension Clause of Section IX
No Bills of Attainder or Ex post facto Laws Clause of Section IX
Contract Clause of Section X
Legal Tender Cases
Others
Import-Export Clause of Section X
Compact Clause of Section X


Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: