"WHO'S WHO"

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 144, 21 June 1933, Page 5

"WHO'S WHO"

USE OF TITLE PUBLISHERS AT LAW SETTLEMENT REACHED The .work of biographical reference "Who's Who in Now Zealand and the Western Pacific," compiled aud published by Dr. Guy Hardy Scholeflcld, Parliamentarian librarian, was under discussion in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon when Dr. Scholefield. asked for an injunction restraining a firm known as The International Press Service Association (New Zealand) from publishing a similar book under tho title of ", Who's Who' in New Zealand," "Who's Whd in New Zealand, 1933" or under any style or title of which the words "Who's Who in New Zealand" form a part. After some observations by the Judge (Mr. Justice Ostler), the parties adjourned to confer, and it. was.later announced that a settlement tiad been reached. Mr. G. G. G. Watson,, with Mr! H. J. V. James, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr.- H; F.O'Leary -with Mr. L, K. Wilsou for ,the . defendants. Mr. Watson said the motion was for an .injunction restraining'the defendants from publishing.a book, with the same or a similar title.to that of the plain- , tiff?s. Tho■''plaintiff!■ Dr. Scholefield, was the author and publisher of "Who's Who in New Zealand and the' Western Pacific.'"-' The' work !was first published twenty-iu;e years ago in 1908, and1 since then it hadbeeti republished in. two': subsequent. editions, the^ last in 1932. The plaintiff, in preparing his book, Mi\ Watson went on,'selected men ho thought should be included and then-obtained biographical details from them. He made no charge for the inclusion of a name in the publication, "and profits, if there were any, were' made out of the sale* of the .b'oe'k. The. defendants were a'firm of persons who had come from abroad and commenced business under the title of International Press Service Association: (New Zealand). As soon'as they came to New Zealand they took unto themselves the title of compilers and publishers of "Who's Who in New Zealand." Their- methods of opera-tion.were-different from those of the plaintiff's in that they approached subjects and obtained contracts for £40 or £.23 on the undertaking to publish photographs and ■biographical data in the book and also send out what they, called press service {sheets containing tho photographs and'Vbiographkal dotails to newspapers for use in what counsel understood was , called '' the morgue.1". ; The; defendants had: commenced,business with a full knowledge of the plaintiff's publication,,Dr.,ScholofioHlas far back as 1929 having written to them in connection with the, matter, but they had practically defied him. The. action was not based -on. copyright, because it had been held that the protection, of copyright did not extend to a title, and it was simply a passing-over action.. All the Court had to decide was whether there was any likelihood of deception through the similarity- of the titles of the iyvo books. . • CHABOB FOB INCLUSION. Mr. Watson referred to ,a, number of affidavits made in connection with the case, including^ .one. by Mr. .W. Nash, M.P., who said that as a-result of a letter from the defendarits saying that they were now compiling "Who's Who in New Zealand," 1933 edition, he had supplied biographical data, thinking he was dealing with Dr. Scholefield. There was also an affidavit by Mr..-TV. Jordan, Mayor,of Mastertoh, 'who stated that he had., been approached and told that on a payment of £44 he could get a full page photograph and a full1 page, of biographical matter in tho defendants' book or for £20 or £22 he could;■ have half that spaed. This charge, it was claimed by the defendants, .was for' the press service and not for the publication in the1 "book. .'.His .'Honour:: And", say.a man tlocs not. want.this •wonderful obituary notice after his/death;..'does; ho still get the biographical';notice and photograph in the. book?' : " : ' ■Mr. Olkeary: Yosj Sir. Subsequent affidavits will show/that.thero are 400 contracts and over, 1000. biographical records in the'book. ■. ■_ '. .Mr. Watson said that tho'matter had ■been a subject of ■ negotiation, and virtually, a settlement had been arrived at,-but, since 'then.the. defendaiits had withdrawn. ■ . . Mr. O 'Leary. said that -it was true a virtual settlement had been reached, but a possible difficulty had-then-arisen in.his own and his clients';ininds that by adopting a different title they might be involved, to: some difficulty with the people ■with, whom -they ,had entered into..-contracts.. i "His Honour asked what'was the suggested :change. of title. Mr. O'Leary: .International Press Who's Who,.N;Z.,, 1933. . His Honour: -Surely'that,1 is quite all right? - .■Mr. , O'Leary: 1 -hope "so,, Sir. HiS'Honour said.it was a pity that tho' Negotiations, failed.after 'getting so far.' "Suppose you get an injunction against you, and =, that injunction is .sustained in a higher Court; you. will bo in a worsel position than you are now," he told Mr. O'Leary. ■Mr. O'Leary said ho did not think such a wide injunction as the plaintiff asked for could be, granted. < L In the course of further observations his Honour expressed the opinion that, priina facie, ho did not think that the suggested title of the defendants' work would be-any breach of contract. Mr. O'Leary said that in view of the opinion that the title would be sufficient to satisfy tho contracts, he thought it would satisfy his " clients, and at his suggestion the ■ Court was adjourned to enable the parties to confer. '."'•• , TERMS or SETTLEMENT. When tho Court resumed, Mr. Watson announced that a settlement had-been reached on the following terms. —(1) The defendants will change the title of their .publication to "International Press Who's Who N.Z. 1933,"; (2) such title on-all occasions to be printed in uniform type'similar to the ■ specimen produced and lodged in-C6urt; (3) all stationery, advertising matter, and literature used by the defendants-to contain only the foregoing title. This paragraph does uot apply to Press service sheets which have already been printed, except that any copies of such which may be made availablo to persons other than newspapers shall be altered; (4) the top of each page of the defendants' book shall be headed • only "Who's Who"; (5) any written explanation which the defendants may desire to publish or circulate in any manner whatever to account for the change of name shall first be sub-mitted-for approval arid not published until approved; (6) the plaintiff shall have leave to issuo an injunction at any time in the future on tho present application-without notice: to tho defendants on the plaintiff proving to the satisfaction of • tho Court that the defendants have committed or are about to commit any breach of these terms of settlement; (7.) this memorandum of settlement to be 'filed in Court; (8) the three persons mentioned in O. S. Cook's affidavit as being the persons comprising the defendant firm (William E. -Allison, Sydney, George Richardson, Wei: lington, and Clement Stephen Cook, Wellington) shall be named as defend-

auts in these proceedings; (9) defend-! ants to pay costs,- twenty guineas,- and disbursements, ■ . ■ After the • memorandum had been read, Mr. O'Leary, addressing the Court, said his Honour's expression of opinion that probably the alteration would not affect the defendants' contracts with , subscribers. had enabled a settlement without any difficulty.. His Honour said that if a contract to supply "Who's Who in Now Zealand" was performed by supplying "Who's Who N.Z." it would take very strong 7'easons to convince him that it was not a satisfactory performance of the contract. ' !