Superior Form Builders, Inc. v. Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Company, Incorporated Dan Chase, and Lilly Chase

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that mammal taxidermy mannequins are not \useful articles\ under the Copyright Act because they function \merely to portray the appearance\ of an animal
• concluding that animal mannequins were not useful articles because “[their] usefulness [was] their portrayal of the appearance of animals”
• distinguishing the animal mannequins at issue from “aesthetically pleasing articles of industrial design”
• distinguishing the animal mannequins at issue from \aesthetically pleasing articles of industrial design\
• distinguish- ing the animal mannequins at issue from “aesthetically pleasing articles of industrial design”
• “The copyright is the author’s right to prohibit the copying of the author’s intellectual invention, i.e. the originality of an author’s expression.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).