Page:The copyright act, 1911, annotated.djvu/116

 1<^4 Copyright Act, 1911.

§ 11. in a civil action in the High Court or by -vvay of summary proceedings as prescribed. If an action is brought in the High Court an injunction may be granted in respect of future offences (s).

In an action brought under sect. 7 (4) of the Fine Arts Copyright Act, 1862, for making copies of a drawing which had been altered in form and coloured without the artist's consent, it was held that a bond fide belief that ho was entitled to make the alterations was no answer to the plaintiff's claim (s). The Court expressed the view that the colouring was an important element in arriving at a decision as to whether the work had been altered Avithin the meaning of the section. It was open to doubt whether colouring alone amounted to an alteration (s).

Appeals to 12. Ally persoii aggrieved by a summary con-

flSsionl viction of an offence mider the foregoing pro- visions (i^) of this Act may in England and Ireland appeal to a court of quarter sessions and in Scotland under and in terms of the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts.

Unless a right of appeal to a Court of Quarter Sessions had been expressly provided, there would have been no such right of appeal, except against a sentence involving imprisonment without the option of a fine (u). There is aj)parently no right of appeal to quarter sessions against an order requiring the infringing copies to be destroyed or delivered up. In no case can an informant appeal to quarter sessions if the alleged offender is acquitted (x) . If either party is dissatisfied with the determination either of the Court of first instance or the Court of Quarter Sessions as being erroneous in point of law he may apply in writing within three days to the justice or justices to state a case for the opinion of a Divisional Court, and the

��(») Carlton Illustrators v. Cokman (1910), 27 T. L. R. 65.

(i!) Sect. 11.

{u) Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), s. 19 ; H. v. JJ. of Dnomhire (1857), 21 J. P. 773; R. v. Stock (1838), 8 A. & E, 405, 412.

(.<•) R. V. //. of London (1890), 25 Q. B. D. 357.

�� �