The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-05

may be disturbed or destroyed by the an
nouncement of new rule. The decision
.sWas the Bate invention patented abroad
SO, the American patent expired with the
foreign patent, and thereby the American
public became entitled to use. the invention
mitted to use it. Congress in effect, by the
existing laws, says to an inventor seeking
of his invention for the term prescribed BY
law: II your invention has not been intro
for more than two years you may, upon
complying with the conditions prescribed,
obtain an American patent. and you may,
il you can obtain a foreign patent. But
the American patent will be granted on the
condition that If you obtain the foreign pat
ent first your invention shall be free 70 the
American people whenever, by reason OF
the expiration of the foreign patent. 1t be-
comes free to people abroad, but in no case
shall the term of the American patent ex-
ceed seventeen years This we deem to be
sound Interpretation of the statute CIV,
ing to the words used the meaning required
by their Ordinary signification. In our
Judgment the language used is so plain ana
natural. obvious meaning would be justly
regarded as indicating purpose 70 change
the law by judicial action. based upon some
The decision further says: sIt is also said
that the United States promised the in
give him a patent for the full term of sev-
enteen years from the date of his patent.
was entitled to one at the time of such APP
plication; and, consequently, curtailment
of that term by reason of something occur d
for which he May not be responsible, is not
consistent with good faith on the part OF
would hesitate to accept any construction
of act of Congress that would imply bad
eTnmert But the contention Just referred
to assumes the very matter in dispute. 1t
assumes that the promise to the inventor
was not accompanied by any condftion au-
thorizing the government TO limit the term
of it's patent to some period less than sey-
to issue patent is made with the reserva-
ton in the statute containing the promise
that the patent, when issued, should De
limited to expire with any foreign patent
previously issued for the same invention,
then there is no basis for the suggestion
lates any pre- mise made to the inventor
FINDING OF THE COURT.
After dsposing of numerous incidental
points OF the plaintiff the decision pro-
ceeds: "a good deal can be said about the
intention of Congress as manifested by its
legislation to deal literally with inventors,
and especially those who were citizens of
the United States. This is true But it is
for Congress to prescribe the conditions on
which it will secure to inventors the ex-
elusive right to their inventions. What
may be due inventors is a matter about
which there may well exist differences of
opinion. 1t is the province of the legisla-
tive branch of the government to say when
a patent to an inventor shall expire, and,
therefore, when the public may enjoy, with
out charge, the benefit of the invention COW
cred by it. We can very well understand
how the existing statute may in some cir
cumstances operate injuriously to an Amer
lean inventor who, in addition to the ex-
elusive rights granted to him in this coun-
try for the term of seventeen years, wishes
to secure a monopoly for his invention be-
fore obtaining one here, the American pat
ent is limited by law, whether it Is SO ex-
r.roc cod or NO IN fha m font ifrp1f To
pire with the foreign patent having the
shortest term. This is the case it appears,
from the standpoint of the patentee, With
out regard to the interests of the American
public.
erationS were or were not sufficient TO in-
duce the change made by the twenty-ffth
section of the act of 1870 and by the exist
ing statute. They are referred to only as
showing what Congress may have had in
!. view when it provided, as it did, that an
invention covered by a foreign patent,
be obtained before receiving an American
patent, should be free to the American
public as soon as it became free by reason
of the expiration of the foreign patent to
the people of other countries. If this prin-
tain csses i is it far 1;onpress whose iscra-
tion is not subject to judicial control, to
make provision for those cases, IL it be
possible to do so without such injury to
the people of our country as ought not to
be inflicted on them.
s.The rule prescribed by the twenty-fifth
produced in Section 1887 of the Revised
Statutes, and the latter section never hav-
ing been amended, we ought not, after the
lapse of nearly twenty-five years from the
passage of the act of 1870 place on its
twenty-ffth section, or on Section 1887 of
the Revised Statutes which took it's place
any Interpretation other than that which
the ordinary natural meaning of their
words import. Our answers, therefore, to
the questions. certified are that the in
vention for which the United States issued
a patent to Bate was, under the facts
stated previously patented in a foreign
country within the meaning of those words
in Section 1887 of the Revised Statutes and
that the United States patent to him ex-
pired under the terms of that section before
the expiration of seventeen years from its
date. Let it be so certified to the Circuit
Court of Appeals. -
Effect of the Decision.