¶11. Copyrights <@=>79—Infringement—Actions—Jurisdiction.
¶2An action for infringement of a copyright, under Act March 4, 1909, c. 320, 35 Stat. 1084, may, under section 35 thereof (Comp. St. 1913, § 9556) be maintained in the District Court of the district where there is infringement by the principal or his agent.
¶3[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Copyrights, Cent. Dig. § 67; Dec. Dig. <§=>79J
¶42. Copyrights <@=>79—Actions for Infringement—Service of Process.
¶5In an action for infringement of copyright, under Act March 4, 1909, brought in the District Court of the district where there is infringement by the principal or his agent, service of summons on the agent is sufficient; but service of summons on defendant in another district in the same state must be set aside.
¶6[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Copyrights, Cent. Dig. § 67; Dec. Dig. <S=>79.]
¶7At Law. Action by Daniel C. Wagner against William W. Wilson. Service of summons set aside.
¶8Rufus Lewis Perry, of Brooklyn, N. Y., for plaintiff.
¶9Edmund Fletcher Driggs, of Brooklyn, N. Y., for defendant.
¶10<@ss>For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
¶12[1, 2] The court has jurisdiction over an' action for infringement of copyright (35 Stat. 1075), and by section 35 this action can be maintained in a district where there is infringement by the principal or his agent. Service on the agent is sufficient.
¶13Whether the present action can be maintained is not to be decided upon the present motion. Motion to dismiss as to jurisdiction over the alleged cause of action is denied.
¶14This is not a “local” suit, and hence the service did not give jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Even in a patent case, the plaintiff cannot have process served in another district in the same state (Judicial Code [Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1100] § 48 [Comp. St. 1913, § 1030]), but must make service of the alleged agent. Service of summons will be set aside.