Judgment Gyles v Wilcox

lord hardwicke, jurist presided on case.

the opinion, written hardwicke, found true abridgement of published book may considered entirely separate, new work, abridgement showed labour, originality, education, , judgement of editor. new book did not run risk of infringing rights of author or bookseller owned publishing rights. however, lord hardwicke drew distinction between works made , colourably shortened . hardwicke refused compare books himself determine whether modern crown law indeed fair abridgement, or force judge , jury sit , hear both books read, instead opting have 2 legal experts , literary master read books , report findings court. parties allowed choose these examiners, in way leaving case arbitration. after week in parties given chance make amends outside of court, book in question ruled colourable shortening, created circumvent law, , infringement of gyles printing rights.

in decision, hartwicke went counter prevailing view statute of anne should interpreted strictly, proclaiming, quite of different opinion, , ought receive liberal construction, far being monopoly, intended secure property of books in authors themselves, or purchasers of copy, recompense pains , labour in such works may of use learned world.