Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-08-08
HITS PATENT LAWS
Continued from First Page.)

competition was the accepted law Of
trade and when combinations in restraint
Of trade were not in contemplation. So
long as such conditions continued and the
avenues Of competition were kept open
the monopoly granted by the patent law,
limited as it was. in time tended to. stimu-
late competition. 1t melted inventors to
new effort and capitalists and business
men were encouraged to develop inven-
tons. Under these conditions a patent.
while granting monopoly In q specific
article. had rarely tendency to mOnop-
few inventions weer so fundamental in
character as to give the owner Of the
patent q monopoly in any branch Of
the trade; and every great nancaI
patent was sure to result in rival
inventions. But when concerns which
are or naturally would be owners
Of competing patents combine to dominate
situation arises; the patent perverted
from Its original use becomes a part Of q
monopoly of mOnOpOlies or Is used as an
instrument for securing a trade monopoly
and such monopolies are attended by the
twin evils Of extortionate prices and an
arrest Of progress in that branch Of in
dustry.
The tendency of monopoly to estab-
hsh extortionate prices Is a matter OF
common knowledge. The tendency of
monopoly to arrest development Is equal
ly marked. though less discussed. 1t is
the more insidious and perhaps the more
dangerous Of the incidents of monopoly
in history"
The bill has a clause limiting a patent
right to nineteen years exclusive of the
time actually consumed in the patent
office In considering it. or by the courts In
deciding on some phase Of 1t. This pro-
procrastination that has become proverb-
ial on the part Of applicants for patents
Under the existing law an applicant can
1ritter away years in correspondence,
replying to letters concerning trivial de-
tails The effect Of this Is practically
to prolong the duration Of the monopoly.
In some instances the preliminary pro-
ceedings have been drawn out over a
course Of twelve or fifteen years"
Provisions Of oldheld Bill.
Under the Oldfield bill two years will
be the limit allowed for the oreliminaries,
ent Office or courts.
This same section Of the bill has for
its object the prevention of what the re-
port calls shelving patents" This is
described as buying up patents SO that
one large concern can control all the pat-
ents in any one industry and thus pre-
vent competition. The bill specifies that
the owner of a patent must actually use
it to public advantage or lose the right to
manufacture exclusively under it.
The report deals with the resale price"
question with considerable technical
phraseoiogy.
The bill seeks to upset the present
practice OF considering as an infringe
ment Of a patent any sale Of any pat
ented article below the price fixed by the
manufacturer. For instance, many we'll
known articles Of everyday use have the
same retail price the world over This
Is matter controlled by the manufac-
turer. and any cut-rate sale is liable to a
SUIT in the United States courts on the
ground that It is an infringement. Many
famous and well known cases are cited in
the report. The bill would make 1t not
matter Of suit on the patent but SIM
ply matter Of contract with manufac-
turer and dealer
If such restrictions regarded as con-
tracts are legal reads the report, they
are not invalidated by this section. The
only possible effect of this section Is to
declare that the breach Of such restric-
tons shall not give rise to an action for
infringement of the patent"
The latter section Of the report goes
In to great detail. explaining how the bill
Is framed to break up certain features
Of the trust problems.