Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-06-12
TO STOP AN ABUSE.
The Peters Bill to Restrict the Monop
oily of Patents,

There is little chance for legislation at
this special session OF Congress relating
to any subject not on the programme OF
the majority leaders in the House, ana
not much that is on that programme is
hkeIy TO get through the senate put
that does not prevent the Introduction OF
bills which will deserve serious consid-
Grafton in the future and may as Wen De
made familiar beforehand one such mas
been introduced in the House by Mr.
Peters of Massachusetts, the purpose OK
winch is to put stop 10 one OF the
worst abuses of the patent monopoly
which our laws leave SO completely unde-
strieted This bin forbids any owner OF
letters patent covering tools Machinery
or any appliances or device to make II
condition of any sale, lease or incense
10 use such patented article, that the
purchaser, lessee or licensee shal not
buy, lease or use, whether in connection
with the use of such article or otherwise,
ANY machinery, tools implements, APP
pliances, material or merchandise OF any
person, firm, corporation or association
other than such vendor, lessor or llcen-
sor." Such owner of patents is also for
hidden to revoke any sale. lease or IL
cense to use on account of the purchase
lease or use of other machinery, etc.
This is plainly aimed al the kind of
monopoly that is exercised by what is
known as the "Shoe Machinery Trust"
in Massachusetts. whose methods have
been made familiar 40 the public. Not
satisfied with the complete monopoly
which the law~gfves it for making the
hi, {ah hYl1
patents II undertakes 10 prevent the use
of any other for like purposes This it
accomplishes by refusing to sell its own
products at all and making leases for
their use under contracts which bind the
lessees to use no other. and To have all
requirements ami repairs made by itself
and with materials which it supplies II
the contract is violated in any particular
it reserves the right to take away the
machinery as its own property. s.
To make this device effective the Shoe
Machinery Company must have exclusive
control of machinery and appliances nee
essary for various processes of shoe
manufacturing, and it acquires this by
buying up new patents that may conflict
with its purpose. Not long ago a shoe
manufacturing concern, after long con-
test with the trust succeeded in equip.
ping its factory completely with newly
invented machines for which it held the
patents, some of them being improve
ments upon anything previously patent
ed. No sooner did its competition begin
IL be seriously felt and threaten to ex-
tend in the industry than 1t was bought
out by the trust. selling not only all its
machines and patents but its own shoe
manufacturing business at a huge profit.
In that way the monopoly was renewed
and REINFORCED
If this can be done in one line of ma
chinery for an important industry it
may be done in another by a sufficiently
powerful combination of capital and UNI
scrupulous ability. AS this is not mat.
ter of interstate commerce this form OF
contract cannot be forbidden or prevent
ed by the Federal Government directly
That can be done by State laws, but it is
difficult to secure proper legislation even
in one State, and securing uniformity of
State legislation is virtually impossible
Not only is the monopoly not in inter-
state commerce. but it is not effected by
combination or agreement between COM
petitors. The Government grants the
monopoly in the patents, but it has the
power to lay down reasonable conditions
for its exercise and to prevent its abuse.
This it ought to do, and the bill intro
dueed should not be allowed to die with
this session of Congress.-New York
Journal of Commerce and Commercial
Bulletin.