Registrar, gave his considered judge ment"in the case Millington Saphiere, the hearing of which was jeoncluded on May 30.
Tt.was then alleged. that Mity Theodore Saphiere had used without [permission or right certain portions of "Millington's City. Directory of Hongy & Home ublfeation named "the. Shanghat in, compiling
Guide," thereby infringing. the rex quirements of the Copyright Act (1911) See, 11. (1) (¢) and the Ching JOrder, in Council (1925) Art. 78."
Mr. Anderson then dismissed the: prosecution on the ground that the terms of Art. 78 of the China Order in Council had not been complied with so far as exhibition of the Copyright Act in the "'public offices" of H.M: Consulate was concerned, fand said that he would give his considered judgment at a later date, Mr, John MeNeill appeared for secution; Mr. M. Reader Harris defended.
The full judgment follows:—
"The defendant here is charged with having knowingly during the month of April and/or May, 1930, distributed, for the purposes of trade, copies of the 'Shanghai Guide' thereby infringing the copyright of the complainants in their publication known as the 'City Directory' (Hongs. and Homes) contrary to. See. IL (1) (e) of the Copyright Act of: 1911. When the case first came before me on May 24, 1930, MeNeill in a very short opening speech referred to Article 73 of the China Order in Council, (1925). 1 refer to this now because Mr.
MeNeill, at the resumed hearing on May 80, rather wished to drop Article 73 altogether." At this h ing Mr. Harvis for the defence the point that the complaint di ed no offence that could be tried by me or could be tried in Shanghai at all. He did so on two gran firstly, 'That summary remote shall extend only to the United Kingdom.' On this point he referred See. XIII of the C..A, (1911) land See, XXV (1).
"The latter section says that this Act, except sch of the provisions as. are expressly restricted to the United Kingdom, shall extend throughout His' Majesty's Dominions, provided that it shall not extend to a self governing dominion unless declared by the Legislature of that dominion to be in force therein. Mr. Harris! second ground was that if there is no offence under Article 73 of the China Order in Council, there is no offence at all. be convenient here to see what.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.