24 FEDERAL nnronrmn.
priafed to gain an advantage from the reputation and popularity
which Johnston`s work had acquired under it, and that this appro-
priation of it is calculated to make the works of the defendants pass
for his to some extent. It is true that the name "Frank Leslie" is
added, so that the title is "Frank Leslie’s Chatterbox," and the ad-
dress of the publishing house is put on. This appears to be done,
however, for the purpose of adding the reputation of Frank Leslie
and of that publishing house to that of the Chatterbox, rather than
for that of building up a new reputation under that name. If nothing
had been wanted of the popularity which had been acquired under it,
and which it stood for, it could have been left, and another name
taken to build up. The defendants do not copy the orators’ publica-
tions, butimitate them, and apply the name of the orators’ publica-
tions to their imitations.
Let a decree he entered for the orators for an injunction and an
account, with costs.
ATLANTIC Minnme Co. v. Bownmn and others.
(Oircuit Oourl, S. D. New York. February, 1886.)
TRADE-MARK—INFRINGEMENT—DA1tIAGES—·PROFITS.
Where a party has made profits by the sale of goodsin violation of the rights
of another in a trade-mark, the owner of the trade-mark is entitled to them, ,
whether the same profits would have been made by him or not, and not to any
more if they would, for the same profit could not be made by both.
In Equity.
Antonio Knauth, for orator. '
Fred']: P. Foster, for defendants.
WHEELER, J. The final decree establishes the right of the orator
to the use of the word "Champion" as a trade-mark for Hour; that ‘
the defendants have infringed upon that right; and that the orator is
entitled to recover of them the profits to the defendants, and damages
to the orator, due to the infringement. The master has reported that
the defendants have used the trade-mark in the sale of,900 barrels
of Hour, and have made a proht of 25 cents per barrel through that
infringement, amounting to $225; and that the orator has suffered
damages to that amount thereby. The defendants except to this Hnd-
ing only. The principal question is whether it is warranted by the
evidence. The evidence tended to show that Hour of the orator’s hav-
ing that mark was in the same market, that it would bring 25 cents
more per barrel on account of that mark, and that the defendants
used the mark in making the sales. The defendants' evidence tended
to show that the Hour would not bring any more on account of the