This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1913 edition. Excerpt: ...to a large extent, made from photographic reproductions of the goods catalogued in the plaintiff's catalogue. That applies, not only to separate articles of ware, but it applies to the representations of bath-rooms furnished with several articles of enamelled ware. These catalogues made by the defendant bear the word "Standard." Correspondence between the defendant and its engraver is produced, which indicates the desire, on the defendant's part, to have the exact shades of color in their labels, which appear in the labels which the plaintiff uses. The whole practically convinces me beyond question that the defendant intended to avail itself of the popularity and reputation of the plaintiff company, and while proof of actual passing-off of the defendant's goods as those of the plaintiff, has not, to any considerable extent, been made, there can, I think, be no doubt that that has occurred in a large degree. The particular form of the def-endant's articles cannot, of course, give rise to a claim on the part of the plaintiff against the defendant, as these goods are not protected by any registration of designs, and there are goods, which are I I A.C. Judgment of Archibald, J. at Trial. of the same form as those, in common use for a long period of time. Yet, where the question arises as to the good or bad faith of the defendant, identity of forms and, particularly, the identity of combined installation of toilet goods in a single apartment, is important. I cannot doubt but that the manner in which the defendant has offered its goods to the public, and advertised them, the similarity of the labels, similarity of combination in catalogue, the use of the word "Standard," were fitted to deceive the...