MY NOTES: Business Organizations | Constitutional Law I | Copyright Law | Evidence | Wills and Trusts

Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp., 274 F.2d 487 (1960) p.437


copyright infringement: fabrics


Plaintiff made printed fabrics. Defendant was accused of copying some of the elments of the fabric.


Whether the defendant copied plaintiff's patterns in the fabric.


The ordinary observer must determine substantial similarity in this case because the intended audience of the fabric was ordinary people. Not expert witness because this fact is to be decided by ordinary person (which would ultimately be a jury). There can be no copyright in the ideas disclosed but only in their expression.


The defendant violated plaintiff's copyright protection because to the ordinary observer it would appear that the fabrics were the same.


In deciding how far an imitator must depart from an undeviating reproduction to escape infringement one should consider the uses for which the design is intended, especialy the scrutiny that observers will give to it as used. Here, the ordinary observer would be disposed to overlook the disparities, and regard the aesthetic appeal between the two fabrics as the same.


This is the ultimate question of fact; this is why this goes to a jury. Constitution says the jury is the finder of fact.

Created on: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 at 19:35:00 (PDT)

Copyright © Thompson Resources, 1999, all rights reserved.