Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Wheaton v. Peters

 
Law Encyclopedia: Wheaton v. Peters
This entry contains information applicable to United States law only.

The 1834 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591, 8 L. Ed. 1055, delineated the differences between rights in a copyright at common law and in federal statutory law.

Wheaton v. Peters was the first significant copyright decision by the Supreme Court. A copyright grants the creator of an artistic or creative work a limited monopoly in its use, based on the public policy that such a monopoly encourages creativity and invention. In Wheaton, the Court established the basic foundation of U.S. copyright law, holding that the statutory requirements for securing a copyright must be strictly followed and that copyright exists primarily for the benefit of society and not the creator.

The case centered on whether Supreme Court decisions, which were public documents, could be copyrighted. Henry Wheaton, the official reporter of decisions for the Court between 1816 and 1827, sued Richard Peters, Jr., his successor, for violating the copyright Wheaton obtained for his twelve volumes of Supreme Court decisions, entitled Wheaton's Reports. Peters had published and sold a book called Condensed Reports of Cases in the Supreme Court of the United States, which contained every Court decision from its inception to 1827, when Peters's Report began publication. Wheaton charged that the Condensed Reports contained all the reports of cases in the first volume of Wheaton's Reports without any significant abbreviation or alteration and that the publication and sale of this work infringed on his copyright. Wheaton sought an injunction to stop the sale of the work.

Peters denied that the publication infringed any copyright Wheaton claimed to possess. In addition, Peters asserted that Wheaton did not have a valid copyright because he failed to satisfy all the federal statutory requirements that were essential for the creation of copyright. The trial court agreed with Peters and dismissed the lawsuit. Wheaton then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Court affirmed the lower court decision and made three rulings that defined copyright law in the United States. First, the Court rejected Wheaton's contention that he possessed a perpetual copyright in his Reports under the common law of Pennsylvania. Though Wheaton may have complied with Pennsylvania procedures on securing a copyright, the Court held that the common law of Pennsylvania did not address the issue of copyrights and therefore the state could not grant any protection to literary property.

The Court also rejected Wheaton's argument that he had complied with the applicable provisions of the federal copyright law and therefore was entitled to copyright protection. The 1802 copyright law required a series of steps to secure a copyright: a book was to be deposited with the clerk of the appropriate district court, the record made by the clerk was to be inserted in the first or second page, public notice was to be given in the newspapers, and within six months after publication a copy of the book was to be deposited in the Department of State.

During the trial, there was uncertainty about whether Wheaton gave public notice and deposited the book in the Department of State. Wheaton asserted that he had completed the first two acts, which were sufficient to perfect his copyright. The Supreme Court, however, disagreed. It stated that the significance and wisdom of a law is a matter for the legislature, and not the Court, to determine. Therefore, all four steps were required to perfect title.

Finally, the Court held that no reporter could have any copyright in the written opinions issued by the Court and that the Court could not grant such a right to any reporter. This holding was essential to the free flow of public information, for if Wheaton could control through copyright the distribution of court decisions, then other private actors could copyright and publish other public information, such as congressional debates or statutes, and restrict its dissemination.

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Wikipedia: Wheaton v. Peters
Top
Wheaton v. Peters

Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 19, 1834
Full case name Henry Wheaton and Robert Donaldson, Appellants
v.
Richard Peters and John Grigg
Citations 33 U.S. 591 (more)
Holding
While the common law undoubtedly protected the right to one's unpublished writings, this is a very different right from that which asserts a perpetual and exclusive property in the future publication of the work, after the author shall have published it to the world.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority McLean
Dissent Baldwin

Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (Pet. 8) 591 (1834), was the first United States Supreme Court ruling on copyright. The case upheld the power of Congress to make a grant of copyright protection subject to conditions and rejected the doctrine of a common law copyright. This was also Chief Justice John Marshall's last major case.

Contents

Facts

The case arose out of the printing of the Supreme Court's own opinions. Henry Wheaton, the third reporter of decisions, had compiled with great care the opinions of the Court, complete with annotations and summaries of the arguments in Court, useful material but which made the volumes of his reports costly and out of the reach of most lawyers. His successor as reporter, Richard Peters, in addition to publishing the current volumes of reports, had gone over his predecessor's work, eliminating the arguments and other extraneous material, and publishing an abridged edition in which he reduced twenty-four volumes into six. While the reporter did receive a $1,000 per year salary from the government, it did not cover the full expenses of preparing the reports and the reporters relied on the sale of the books to recoup their costs. By creating more affordable volumes, Peters devastated the market for Wheaton's more expensive books.

Wheaton sued in Pennsylvania and lost in the circuit court — Wheaton v. Peters, 29 Fed. Cases 862 (No. 17,486) (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1832). The judge, Joseph Hopkinson, ruled that copyright is purely the creation of statute and one must comply with the requirements of registering a copyright, putting a notice in the work covered, etc., in order to receive protection. Judge Hopkinson also ruled that there was no federal common law, one must look to the states and, even then, the states did not necessarily adopt the entire English common law — assuming there was a common law copyright.

Wheaton then appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

Result

John McLean, who himself had publishing experience as the founder of an Ohio newspaper, wrote the opinion of the Court. In it, he declared that while the common law undoubtedly protected the right to one's unpublished writings — e.g. a diary, personal letters — "this is a very different right from that which asserts a perpetual and exclusive property in the future publication of the work, after the author shall have published it to the world." (33 U.S. 591 at 658) McLean declared there was no common law right: "Congress, then, by this act, instead of sanctioning an existing right, as contended, created it." (33 U.S. 591 at 660-61) McLean also rejected Wheaton's contention that requiring registration and the other conditions of the law were improper. Congress was giving Wheaton and other creators a special protection and it was not unreasonable to expect them to observe the formalities, the Court ruled.

This precedent corresponded to the English decision in Donaldson v. Beckett, which was cited in the Court's opinion.

See also

Further reading

  • Deazley, Ronan (2004). On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth-century Britain (1695-1775). Oxford: Hart. ISBN 1841133752. 
  • Goldstein, Paul (1994). Copyright's Highway: From Gutenberg to the Celestial Jukebox. New York: Hill and Wang. ISBN 0809053810. 
  • Patterson, Lyman Ray (1968). Copyright in Historical Perspective. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. 
  • Patterson, Lyman Ray; Lindberg, Stanley W. (1991). The Nature of Copyright: A Law of Users' Rights. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press. ISBN 0820313475. 
  • Smith, Jean Edward (1996). John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation. New York: Henry Holt & Company. ISBN 080501389X. 

External links


 
 

 

Copyrights:

Law Encyclopedia. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Copyright © 1998 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Wheaton v. Peters" Read more