In the Trade-Mark Cases40 it was held that the ordinary trademark has no necessary relation to invention or discovery, and, therefore, its use may not be regulated by Congress under the power to provide for the issuance of patents and copyrights.

38 103 U. S. 334; 26 L. ed. 565.

39 See also Allen v. Riley, 203 U. S. 347; 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 95; 51 L. ed. 216.

40 100 U. S. 82; 25 L. ed. 550.

Lacking this authority the court held that the Federal Government has power to legislate with reference to trade-marks only in so far as their use in interstate trade is concerned. The law in question in the case not being thus limited was held void.41

In Higgins v. Keuffel42 it was held that a mere label might not be copyrighted. "To be entitled to a copyright," the court declared, "the article must have by itself some value as a composition, at least to the extent of serving some purpose other than as a mere advertisement or designation of the subject to which it is attached."

Little v. Gould43 is the authority for the doctrine that, in the absence of congressional regulation, a State may afford protection to literary productions.

Piracies and Felonies on the High Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations.