New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-04-08
WIRELESS TELEGRAPH PATENTS.

Berlin dispatches declare that the present
owners of one system of wireless tclegraphy are
a. bout 10 sue the users of another for infringe
ment of patent The plaintiffs in this case are
Siemens & Halske, we'll known manufacturers
of electrical machinery. The defendants VIII
be either DR.. Slaby and his associate, Count
Arco. or else the German Government, which
has adopted for its navy the Slaby-Arco appa-
ratus. 1t is asserted by Sierncns & Haske that
certain features Of this were devised by Braun.
whose patents they hold The Braun system.
by the way, is now in operation at two land sta
TONS Heligoland and Cuxhaven. and on the
lightship At the mouth of the Ebe.
Litigation of this character was TO be
pected sooner or later, and, on the whole, is 10
be welcomed. The history Of invention shows
not only that several minds are often engaged
upon the same problem simultaneously. but also
that the same solution will occasionally be found
by two or three investigators. In consequence
of the secrecy with which most inventors con
duct their original experiments. the similarity
between the expedionts adopted by rivals may
remain undctected Il long time. Even where
there has been n partial revelation of methods
there may be unconscious copying. In such
cases it is not unusual to ask the courts to
award the honors and pecuniary benefits to
which the first dscoverer of the method in
question is Justly entitled. Edison's experience
with his incandescent lamp and Bells with the
telephone are familiar illustrations of the point.
When such controversies arise, of course IN
vestors and the general public, well the
competing inventors interested in having
the disputes adjudicated
Decisions concerning the authorship Of vari-
ideas utilized in wireless telegraphy are the
more desirable because of the considerable num-
Der of experts who have taken a hand in the de-
velopment of that art and because of the differ
ences Of opinion which have already become
manifest. Siemens & Halske said to have
imputed TO Marconi, as we'll as to Dr. Slaby.
the adoption Of some of Brauns methods. Mar
conf in turn thinks that DR. Slaby has benefited
by a disclosure to the German authorities made
few years ago by the young Anglo italian. In
the mean time DIR. Slaby pronounces Tesla "the
father of wireless telegraphy." The last named
inventor is making no pretences openly at pres
emf. but ne will doubtless define his attitude
more precisely within year. and perhaps ask
the courts to interpose in his behalf. Nor are
the men here specified the only ones immedi-
ately involved in the complication. On both
sides of the Atlantic electricians of high repute
have been studying special phases Of the sub
ject and devising more or less original means
for performing some part of the operation.
Some of them have not fully completed their
experiments. Others have made considerable
headway but have not protected themselves
adequately with patents. Even Marconi the
first to he publicly identified with practical
wireless telegraphy is not yet ready to tell the
world about all of his apparatus. An extensive
sitting of claims will be needed in the near
future, therefore and the sooner il begins the
sooner ii will end.
When the courts have dealt with the rivalries
thus represented it is possible that no one man
will be found in full possession of the field. In
asmuch as a great deal of information about
methods and devices is still withheld from the
public. ii is not safe to indulge in prediction.
1t should be remembered, however that wire
less telegraphy embraces number of features
more or less Independent of each other. There
must be wave generation transmission, receiv-
ing and tuning. to say nothing of minor and
incidental functions. 1t is probabl that several
different ways will be found to perform each
one of these duties. One method may possess
a higher efficiency than another perhaps, but it
need not infringe on anybody's patent 1t may
turn out. then. that inventor will have
good transmitter and A poor receiver: second n
poor transmtter and a good receiver. and q
third tuning system superior 10 all others.
They might effect n commercial combination
and pool their issues, but there would probably
be no judicial hindrance to their all carrying on
business. whatever other dra wba ckS there might
be 10 such result.