DUN v. 'LUMBERMEN'S CREDIT ASS'N. 209 U.S. Opinion of the Court. Mn. Jus??cE Mool?�' delivered the opinion of the court. The appellants are the l)roprietors of a r?ercantile agency which publishes at intervals a copyrighted book of reference containing listS of merchants, manufacturers and traders in the United States and the North American British possessions. The book contains information as to the business, capital and credit rating of those who are enumerated in it. The informa- tion is obtained at large expense and is useful to those who are engaged .in trade ai?d commerce, who in large number sub-. scribe to the privilege of consulting copies of 'it, .which are furnished but ? not sold to them. The appellee is a corporation engaged in preparing and publishing a similar book, limited, however, to those engaged in the lumber and kindred trades. The book is called the Reference Book of the Lumbermen's Credit Association. ' The appellants brought in the Circuit Court of the United States a suit in equity, alleging ah infringe- ment of their copyright by the appellee, and praying for an injunction, for an account, and for general relief. After hear- ing evidence, the Circuit Court entered a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, which, with an immaterial modifica- tion, was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals. An appeal to this court was then taken.. Both the coui?s below made findings of fact, which are in substantial agreement. Those findings best appear by quota- tions from the op'mions which follow. The judge of the Circuit Court said :. "From the evidence it appears that defendant admits using complainants' book, but insists that it did so merely for the purpose of comparison and for information as to names, but that in every case it, at great cost, procured original and in- dependent information as to the rating and other facts con- tained in defendants' book. There are in respondents' refer- ence book more than 60,000 names. The evidence shows that there are on hand more than 1,000,000 reports, replies to in- quiries, etc. It further appears that defendants receive large
�
