IDEAL TOY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
J-CEY DOLL CO., INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

2d Cir. | 1961-05-15
Nos. 354, Docket 26799
290 F.2d 710 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1961)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that a prior publication of a doll's body without notice does not preclude copyright protection for the entire doll when notice is properly placed on the final product.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff obtained a preliminary injunction against defendant for alleged copyright infringement of its 'Saucy Walker' doll. Defendant appealed, argui…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff sought redress against defendant for an alleged infringement of plaintiff’s copyrighted “Saucy Walker” doll, a doll having a distinctive head; and, pending full determination of its case, plaintiff obtained a preliminary injunction restraining defendant from any infringement of that copyright. From the grant of this preliminary injunction defendant appeals.

Plaintiff’s copyright notice, an embossed notation “© Ideal Toy Corp.,” appears in two places on plaintiff’s dolls: Between the shoulder blades, and at the nape of the neck adjacent to the hairline.

The defendant argues that inasmuch as the doll’s body had been published previously without a copyright notice plaintiff’s embossed notation of copyright appearing on the shoulder blades of the doll is an attempt to extend copyright protection to the doll’s torso as distinguished from the entire doll, and demonstrates an intent by plaintiff to commit so obvious a fraud on the public that plaintiff is precluded from obtaining any injunction against defendant that would prevent copying. Hence defendant maintains that plaintiff, seeking equity, is guilty of having unclean hands and should be denied access to a court of equity.

We find no merit in the argument that an extra copyright notation on the shoulder blades of this doll ought to deprive plaintiff of access to a court of equity.

Plaintiff seeks an allowance of counsel fees as part of the costs recoverable by it on this appeal. Though we are of the opinion that the appeal lacks merit we cannot say that defendant’s ground is so frivolous as to justify an award of counsel fees.

The injunction order below is affirmed and the cause remanded for further proceedings in the district court.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw