Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc./Concurrence Harlan

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Concurring Opinion
Harlan
 Wikipedia article

United States Supreme Court

376 U.S. 234

Compco Corp.  v.  Day-Brite Lighting, Inc.

 Argued: Jan. 16, 1964. --- Decided: March 9, 1964


Mr. Justice HARLAN, concurring in the result.

In one respect I would give the States m re leeway in unfair competition 'copying' cases than the Court's opinions would allow. If copying is found, other than by an inference arising from the mere act of copying, to have been undertaken with the dominant purpose and effect of palming off one's goods as those of another or of confusing customers as to the source of such goods, I see no reason why the State may not impose reasonable restrictions on the future 'copying' itself. Vindication of the paramount federal interest at stake does not require a State to tolerate such specifically oriented predatory business practices. Apart from this, I am in accord with the opinions of the Court, and concur in both judgments since neither case presents the point on which I find myself in disagreement.

Notes[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse