In Dorr-Oliver, Inc. v. Webster Computer Corp., 30 Conn. Supp. 544, 300 A.2d 45 (1972) the plaintiff employer brought an action to recover moneys that were paid to the defendant for the procurement of an employee. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant could not recover a fee because it was not licensed pursuant to 31-130. Relying on cases from other jurisdictions that had similar statutory schemes, the court held that the defendant did not fall within the definition of an "employment agency" under the statute because: (1) no fee was paid from the employee to the defendant; (2) procuring employees was incidental to the defendant's main service of providing computer systems; (3) the defendant never solicited the public at large or advertised concerning employment placement; (4) the policy behind General Statutes 31-129 to 31-131c is to protect individual applicants (prospective employees) from unscrupulous employment agencies. Dorr-Oliver, Inc. v. Webster Computer Corp., 30 Conn. Supp. at 550-51.