Daily Arizona silver belt., 1909-12-04
WEIGHTS WILL SUE FOR PROTECTION
 OF PATENTS
If Successful Will Control Great Monopoly for Aero
 plane Building

BUFFALO, New York, December 3. A legal fight that will couse a stir in the aeronautical world will have its first hearing in court here tomorrow, when Judge Hazel of the United States District court will hear arguments cn the application of Wilbur and Orville Wright for . preliminary injunction re. straining Glenn II. Curtiss and the Her. ring Curtiss company of Hammondsport, N. Y., from making, using or selling the socaIled Curtiss -aeroplane, and par ticularly restraining the defendants from conducting public exhibitions of such machines.
 The outcome of the contest will be watched eagerly by persons interested in aeronautics, both in America and in Europe.
 The gist of the claim made by the Wrights is that the new Herring. Cur tiss aeroplane, which was built for the AerOnautic society, contains several in Judgements of the Wright patents, which are registered at Washington and in practically every civilized country. The main infringement, it is alleged,
  tips which give stability to the aero. plane, particularly when gliding or in making turns.
 Should the Wrights be successful in the Federal courts and procure the in junction they ask for they will have almost a world wide monopoly of aer. oplane construction at its present stage for there is hardly heavier-than-air flying machine of any consequence, which does not use the flexible wing tip in one form or another Even the BleriOt machine in which the French aviator crossed the English channel last summer, though monoplane, and thus essentially different in it's coastruc. | ton from the Wright flyer, has flexible tips at the extremity of it's wings or planes and would be practically useless without them.
 The Wrights have advanced their claims informally when comparing their machine with others, but this is the first overt step they have taken to establish their sole right to use the flexible tips. Other aeronautieal engi. neers have decried the idea that the Wright patents gave them the sole EAA " A0f ms slNNA't. dilh HdNt NtditN 1 that long before the Wrights did any work in the invention of flying ma. chimes, Hiram Maxim, Chanute and 1 others had devised the flexible tip idea and had adapted it in one form or another to aeroplane construction. The complaint of the Wrights is verr l specific and reads:
 "That the defendant, alleging to bl ' formed for the purpose of promoting aerial flying, procured the Herring Cur tiss company and one Glenn H. Curtiss personally, both of Hammondsport, N | Y., to make the flying machine herein | complained of and deliver them to tho | defendant (the Aeronautie society, ] under whose auspices the said Glenn II Curtiss is giving public exhibition l flights with the said infringing flying machines within the jurisdiction of thi, court v
 The Wright flying machine factory ! at Dayton, Ohio, the brothers allege is suffering financially from the in fringement of these patents, and tho brothers ask that when their losses have been estimated they be awarded three | times the amount compensatory and | punitive damages. ''