The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-06-11
THE QUESTION OF PATENTS

Ever since the vigorous protest pub.
licly made by Chief Justice White of
the l. 5. Supreme Court against the
doctrine of the four judges overruling
tnree In the mimeograph patent case,
there has been keen interest in the
public mind on the patent question. It
is admitted that our patent laws are
antiquated, traditional. and untitled 10
the conditions of the present day AS
shown by Chief Justice White, under
our system of patents a patentee can
control not only his patent, but the use
oil all auxiliaries to that patent. even
though those auxiliaries are not them.
selves patented. Thus the inventor of
an improvement in locomotives couI,J
require that the locomotive CARVING
his invention should be made under his
own direction and at his own shops of
material supplied by himself As point
ed out by the New York Herald. the
inventor Of the electric transformar
could require that all the wires and ma
chinery wherein his invention is used
must be supplied by himself, all Of the
old equipment and appliances being
thrown out, Against this sort Of thing
Chief Justice White made his protest
We find in the current Atlantic
Monthly fresh and vigorous discussion
of the patent question by Mr.. Seth K
Humphrey. who proposes new method
for the reward of inventors, the gist OF
which is included in the following ex.
tract
Now suppose we We're TO get away from
ancient traditions, and construct patent
system adapted to the present day The
inventor wants compensation for his dis
covcry; give him the compensatlon-not
The discovery The community wants the
discovery although the plain teaching OF
our patent law makes 1t heresy TO saw
SO. the community is entitled 10 II. Both
ENDS can be attained al once by making
the discovery public In fact az
Wen as in tters-patent. to all
who may wish to make use
Of it. with the single obligation that thoy
snail pay To the inventor legally deter
mined royalties during the life OF his pat
cnt.
Under our present system. the most for
luuate inventors arc those who succeed
I'm establishing their patents on q ROYALTY
basis. The law might as we'll bring this
pppOitunllT TO every inventor, with the
bupeu auEaNlaEe 20 hlfn and to the COM
Wunlty that. instead or being restricted
10 one llcensee. both would do business
WITH an entire industry. The ROYALTIES
carefully graded To provide Just connpen
salon. would be paid TO the inventors.
and a penalty for not doing so would en-
force this reasonable exaction. New in
Fenpops. al once engaging the attention
OF experienced manufacturers throughout
nc country. would automatically come
before the public IN their most perfect
ioruL through well Established channels,
and under conditions assuring competitive
Terms. plus the royalties The inventor
would not OF necessity be forced 10 ro
INTO business. or TO sell his rights FOR n n
arbitrary price. Ills inclination would no
10 retain his patent. supplement lis nubli
cation by advertising IL to the Industry
IlI,ely 10 he interested. and gather direct
irnn II such reward as his invention
might merit
Mr.. Humphrey calls for up.to.date
patent enactmeuts which will rive the
inventor all reasonable rewards ON HI.
patent but viii give the community
also AN opportunity 10 hayc sometime
10 say about it; and iuasmuch as il il
from the community at large that the
patent right is derived, it is no NOR.