The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-01-10
'SELDEN PATENT is
DECLARED INVALID
u. S. Circuit Court of Ap-
peals Reverses Decision
By Judge Hough
VICTORY FOR INDEPENDENT
AUTOMOBILE MAKERS
Injunction Restraining Use
of Otto Engine Must Be
Dismissed

| New York, Jan. 10.-The so-called
| Independent automobile manufacture
ers have won sweeping victory in
| the United States Circuit Court Of APP
peals with a reversal Of the decree
of Judge Hough in the Circuit court
wherein the Selden patent was up
held. The higher courts ruling de-
clares that the defendants. neither
| legally nor morality owned anything
to the patented and holds that the
| improved Otto engine, used by the
| defendants in motor vehicle construc-
| ton, is the equivalent of the Selden
!; engine; but that Its use is not an in
fringement of the Selden patent. Ac-
cordingly, Judge Hough's injunctions
against the Ford Motor company,
| Panhard and Levasser and others, re-
! straining them from using the Otto
engine on the ground of infringement,
must be dismissed by the lower court
to which the causes were remanded
| with such instruction.
The opinion of the Circuit Court Of
Appeals, written by Judge Noyes, says
! in part:
while the conclusion of non-in-
fringement which we have reached
leaves the lpatentee empty handed
with respect to the patent for the
| short time it has to run. it cannot be
| regarded as depriving him through
| any technicality, of the first reward of
his labors. He undoubtedly appr~
ciated the possibilities OF the motor
vehicle at time when his ideas were
regarded as chiInerical. Had he been
able to see far enough, he might have
taken out patent as far-reachlng as
the Circuit court held this one was.
.The Brayton engine was the lead.
| ing engine at the time and his atten-
| tion was naturally drawn to it's sup
posed advantages. He chose that type.
In the light Of events we can see that
had he appreciated the superiority Of
/ the Otto engine and adapted that
| type for his combination. his patent
| would cover the modern automobile
He did not do so. He made the wrong
| choice and we cannot, by placing any
D forced construction upon the patent or
| by straining the doctrine of equiva-
Tents, make another choice for him at
! the expense of these defendants who
neither legally nor morally, owe him
| anything
The Selden patent seeks to control
! the manufacture of virtually all gas
cline automobiles in America. Many
| of the manufacturing companies hold
| licenses under that patent; but there
are many, others which operated in
dependently and in definance of the
patent The licensed companies were
formed into the Association of Lii
censed Automobile Manufacturers,
which excluded the independent COM
panies from it's undertakings such as
automobile shows and the like, and
extensive legal complications were pre-
cipitated.
Representatives of 5 the Association.
of Licensed Automobile Manufacturers
anaounce that. preparations already
are. being made to carry the matter
to the Supreme court.
The statement of the association de-
clares that approximately 80, per cent
of the gasoline motor cars manufac-
tured in this country are now licens-
ed under the Selden patent many
companies having applied for license
after Judge Hough's decision in 1909.