Legal Opinion
Brief English Systems, Inc. v. Owen
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided April 6, 1931No. 317PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChase, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
In so far as the plaintiff claims to have the exclusive right to the use of a published system of shorthand, this suit must fail. There is no literary merit in a mere system of condensing written words into less than the number of letters usually used to spell them out. Copyrightable material is found, if at all, in the explanation of how to do it. Guthrie v. Curlett et al. (C. C. A.) 36 F.(2d) 694, 696. Without suggesting that anything in its shorthand system this plaintiff would retain by copyright for itself alone might have been the subject of a valid…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Baker v. SeldenSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Dymow v. BoltonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- Holmes v. HurstSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Nutt v. National Institute Incorporated for the Improvement of MemoryCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Guthrie v. CurlettCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., Hyperlaw, Inc., Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee v. West Publishing Co. And West Publishing CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Affiliated Enterprises Inc. v. GantzCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1936
- Taylor Instrument Companies v. Fawley-Brost Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1943
- Kingsport Press, Inc. v. Brief English Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- Continental Casualty Company v. BeardsleyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.