AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
Judges

VIBROPLEX CO., Inc., v. J.H. BUNNELL CO.

In Equity. Action by the Vibroplex Company, Inc., against J.H. Bunnell Co. Decree for defendant.

WINSLOW, District Judge.

This is an action in equity to restrain the defendant from the use of the word "BUG" as applied to telegraphic sending machines. Plaintiff also alleged unfair business competition, but that was withdrawn from consideration. The only material question is the validity of the registered trade-mark.

I am convinced that the evidence justifies the conclusion that the word "BUG," as applied to telegraph instruments, is a generic name in common use, and has been for many years, among operators, to characterize the vibrating horizontal arm for the semiautomatic production of code dots, as distinguished from the Morse key, requiring a separate motion of the operator's hand for each dot. This vibrating or fluttering arm, because of its aptness, probably suggested the name "BUG." In any event, the great preponderance of evidence is to the effect that the word is a descriptive term in common use in the particular calling.

When the patent expired, the name of the patented thing becomes publici juris. Singer v. June, 163 U.S. 169, 16 S. Ct. 1002, 41 L. Ed. 118. I do not think that the word "BUG," as applied to the instrument in question, by itself is now susceptible of exclusive appropriation.

Decree for the defendant.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VIBROPLEX CO. v. J.H. BUNNELL CO., (S.D.N.Y. 1926)
(Jun 21, 1926)