Forest City press. (Forest City, Potter County, D.T. [S.D.]) 1883-19??, 1911-06-01
Patensins Free Inventions.
From the Literary Digest.

Patentins Free Inventions.
From the Literary Digest.
III a generous donor should present a
apfaly building to his native town, and
u Stranger should subsequently at
Tempt 10 turn out the librarian, Sell
the BOOKS and occupy the structure as
q select boarding house, he might be
thought to have exceeded his rights i'm
the matter. Proceedings of this sort,
however. are by no means
In the case of other valuable property
donated to the public, we are told
edltorially by the Engineering Record
(New York;. Inventors who choose to
give their inventions to the public
sometimes find that INSCRIPTIONS per-
sons have appropriated and patented
theln, and there seems to ke some diff
nculty In preventing this. In other
words, we have g. defect in our patent
system, which apparently does not on
should desire to do anything with an
inventor Except to derive personal
profit from 1t. We read:
THE theory of the patent law is that
IN return for giving an inventor abso-
late control of his process or apparatus
make public complete information con-
corning it. so that at the expiration Of
the term of the patent the world at
large may profit from his invention.
Tht is essentially a type OF contract
between the United States government
n the individual, by which h gov
ernrnen gains for the people the use
OF many Inventions and the inventors
gain protection for a sufficient period
TO make it possible to profit from the
work they have done.
For reasons which 1t is unnecessary
to discuss here there is a strong feel
Ing among many scientists and engi-
neers against %patenttng apparatus
which can not be manufactured In
commercial quantities or processes
which can not be utilized industrially..
1t is held that inventions relating to
things affecting the health Of commu-
mites or the practice of the scientific
professions should be absolutely free.
Those holding this opinion have either
taken out patents on their inventions
and dedicated these patents to the pub.
lie by legal means, or else they have
published complete descriptions Of the
PRINCIPALS governing their inventions
and OF the inventions themselves, SC
that by means of this prior publication,
subsequent patenting Of the same thing
would be impossible. Unfortunately
the work necessary in the examina-
ton OF patent claims in order to carry
out the full spirit OF the law can not
possibly be done with the a%ppropria-
lions made for it. Even for a thing SO
we'll known as the preparation of ordi-
nary wet concrete, a patent was grant
cd not long ago. a procedure SO f~arcica}
that It is understood to have received
at a meeting of the cabinet.
The cause for granting such q patent
Is manifestly to DO found I'm imperfec.
tons in the method OF ascertaining
prior practice in the art. When IL
to such a special subject as
acoustics it is evident that any refer
ence TO most sources of information re.
garding the prior state of the art is
likely to reveal nothing whatever"
A situation that has recently arisen
In the patent office regarding q case
OF this kind is mentioned by the Rec
ord, which believes that it deserves
wide attention. 1t avs
1T is we'll known that Profcsso.
Wallace c. Sabine. of the graduate
school OF engineering of Harvard uni
versity. has given freely to the world
Tor many years the exceptionally val
liable results Of his Investigations OF
methods Of improving the acoustic
properties Of auditoriums. His work IL
one of the finest examples of the skill.
full adaptation to architectural prob.
lens of the principles Of physics, and
could have been carried out only by
n having a thorough knowledge OF
the science of acoustics. Every step ir
the researcher he made had been pub
licly recorded: the principles used an0
the application of them have 10th been
made public for the express purpose
OF preventing any patenting OF the art
as he has developed 1t with great sue
cess. A young man whom he helped
to apply these principles In a Pittsbure
synagog has nevertheless applied for
q patent On them, thus violating both
professional ethics and ordinary cour-
tesy, but also very nearly leading the
patent office to make a blunder as bad
in it's way as the grant OF the pateni
for wet concrete"