Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1901-03-11
REVIEW
Of the BerIiner
II Decision,
C
By Leading Scientific
Journal.
Sweeping Victory For
the Independents
And a Corresponding Blow to
Monopoly,

patent decision, is given by the Scien-
tifc Americana:
The United States Circuit court for
the District of Massachusetts has just
handed down a decision in the suits
of the American Bell Telephone COM
pany against the National Telephone
Manufacturing company, and the
American Bell Telephone company
against the Century Telephone COM
pany. for infringement of the famous
Berliner patent. No. 463,569, dated
November II, 1891, for microphone
attachment for telephones.
A few remarks concerning this pat
ent. and its history and litigation,
may be of interest at this.time.
AS is well known. the transmission
of speech by telephone requires two
instruments. the first. the transmitter,
into which the speaker talks, and the
second. the receiver. at which the
hearer listens. Mr.. Bells patent Of
1876 described an instrument which
could be used interchangeably for
either of these purposes. In 1878 Mr.
Edison and Mr.. Blake produced trans
mitters, both unlike Mr.. Bells, and
differing from each other in detail,
hut operating on the same general
principle. They both belonged to the
class of transmitters, called micro
phones. the distinguishing feature OF
which is that the undulation OF the
electrical current by means of which
the sonorous vibrations of the air IN
the transmitter are caused to be re-
produced in the receiver, are caused
by variations of pressure between TWO
electrodes remaining constantly III con-
tact. which variations of pressure are
caused by the vibrations of the dia-
phragm of the transmitter.
The Bell company acquired title 10
both these patents, and enjoyed the
exclusive right to the use OF said
inventions during the life Of the re-
spectlve patents.
About the time that the patent on
the Blake transmitter was expiring,
tbe nublic were astonished to learn
that a. patent had just been issued
to the Bell company, covering in the
broadest possible terms the identical
microphone transmitter for which the
telephone subscribers had been paying
rentals in the past, and under which
new patent the Bell company would
be entitled to exact continuance OF
the same rentals for the same instru-
ment for seventeen years longer.
An examination OF the files in the
Patent Office, then for the first time
accessible to the public, showed that
the application for this new patent had
been filed by Emile Berlner, June A.
1877, and had become the property OF
the Bell company in 1878 and had been
controlled by that company to the time
OF It's issue.
The extraordinary delay in the issue
OF the patent, (the application being
all the time under the control of the
Bell company coupled with the man
ifest interest of that company to pro
long its monopoly by means of that
delay, prompted the United States, in
1893, to bring suit against the Bel
company and Berliner to set aside and
cancel the said Berliper patent. Or
Jan. 3, 1885, the United States Circuit
Court entered a decree setting aside
and canceling said patent. On appeal
to the United States Circuit Court OF
Appeals for the First Circuit, thai
court, on May,1s, 1895 reversed the de
cree below, and directed a dismlssal
of the bill of complaint Thereupon
the United States took an appeal to the