Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.
the Delaware Supreme Court
Syllabus
785055Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. — Syllabusthe Delaware Supreme Court

Supreme Court of Delaware

506 A.2d 173

REVLON, INC., a Delaware corporation, MICHEL C. BERGERAC, SIMON ALDEWERELD, SANDER P. ALEXANDER, JAY I. BENNETT, IRVING J. BOTTNER, JACOB BURNS, LEWIS L. GLUCKSMAN, JOHN LOUDON, AILEEN MEHLE, SAMUEL L. SIMMONS, IAN R. WILSON, PAUL P. WOOLARD, EZRA K. ZILKHA, FORSTMANN LITTLE & CO., a New York limited partnership, and FORSTMANN LITTLE & CO. SUBORDINATED DEBT And EQUITY MANAGEMENT BUYOUT PARTNERSHIP-II, a New York limited partnership, Defendants Below, Appellants,  v.  MacANDREWS & FORBES HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellee

No. 353, 354  Argued: October 31, 1985 --- Decided: March 13, 1986

A. Gilchrist Sparks, III (argued), Lawrence A. Hamermesh, and Kenneth Nachbar, of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, Wilmington, and Herbert M. Wachtell, Douglas S. Liebhafsky, Kenneth B. Forrest, and Theodore N. Mirvis, of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, New York, Of Counsel, for Appellant Revlon.

Michael D. Goldman, James F. Burnett, Donald J. Wolfe, Jr., Richard L. Horwitz, of Potter, Anderson & Corroon, Wilmington, and Leon Silverman (argued), and Marc P. Cherno, of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, New York, New York, Of Counsel, for Appellant Forstmann Little.

Bruce M. Stargatt (argued), Edward B. Maxwell, 2nd, David C. McBride, Josy W. Ingersoll, of Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor, Wilmington, and Stuart L. Shapiro (argued), Stephen P. Lamb, Andrew J. Turezyn, and Thomas P. White, of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, and Michael W. Mitchell (New York) and Marc B. Tucker (Washington, District of Columbia), of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, for Appellee.

McNeilly, Moore, Justices, and Balick, Judge (Sitting by designation pursuant to Del. Const., Art. IV, § 12.).

This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."

These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).

A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse