The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1915-12-01
Man With 456 Bridge Patents
Comes to Topeka.
In Conference With w. G.. Tan
DIV, Commissioner of Streets.
HE HAS STARTED az SUITS
All Based on Alleged Infringe
ments of His Rights.
Claims to Have Won IL of
These Up to Date.

Daniel B. Luten of Indianapolis,
Ind, holder of 456 patents on the
construction of concrete and steel
bridges, was in Topeka today and
visited w. G. Tandy, city commission
er of streets.
Luten, whose numerous patents on
concrete bridge construction are the
subject of litigation in Colorado. Kan
sas, Iowa and other states, and which
make it impractical to build a con-
crete and steel bridge without incor-
porating some features covered by
them, talked freely concerning his
side of the controversy.
He says he has started forty-two
suits in various states, all in federal
district courts, alleging infringements
of his patents. OF these, he says sew
enteen have been decided in his far
Vor. In ali these seventeen suits in
validity of his patents was a part of
the defense. OF these seventeen cases
three were decided in his favor, and
in the others compromises were
reached after testimony had been
taken. He insists that there was no
collision with the contending parties
in any of the suits and that all the
suits Were bona fide. Twenty-Five cases
are now pending. None of Luten's
suits has yet been carried to a deci-
sion in any court higher than that in
which he started them. He now has
d sui penang on appear 10 the leu
eral district court, which he lost in
the federal district court of Colorado.
This is only one of five suits which
he has lost in federal district courts,
and which he has appealed to high
er courts.
Charges DiIatory Tactics.
Mr.. Luten said today that he be-
lived S. NJ. Brewster, attorney gem
eral, and S. N. Hawkes. assistant at
torney general, who are defending the
city commissioners of Newton in a
suit brought in the federal district
court by Luten, alleging infringement
of his patents, are purpoSely resort
ing to dilatory tactics. He also
showed a letter from. Hawkes. in
which Hawkes. states that he will soon
file an antitrust suit against some
bridge companies doing business in
Kansas.
Il have been we'll acquainted, with
the bridge business in Kansas for the
last ten years, and 1 know there is no.
bridge trust in Kansas" said Luten-
But 1 do know that State Engineer
Gearnart has violated state laws and
have told Hawkes. that am ready to
tell what 1 know. u But Hawkes. is not
wanting this Information. He and
Brewster seem to want to protect
Gearhart''
Asked whether he would call upon
Hawkes. in the city, Luten SAID he did
not think he would.
Santa Fe railway company is infring
ing upon my patent, 1 will bring suit
against that company. But l am not
in the business of bringing suits to
collect royalties. 1 get my royalties
by contracts" He then explained the
advantage of collecting royalties by
contract instead of waiting until an
infringement of his patents was COM
mitted and then suing.
Where I have a contract, I get the
money and then 1 will not have to
pay it back whether my patents are
declared invalid or not" This "dou-
BILE cinch'' method is the kind which
has been followed in Luten's business
transactions with the city.
Private Concerns Don't Pay.
Luten denies that he has failed to
institute suits against railroad com
panies on the ground that they would
be better able to fight him. But of
the $500 Luten bridges which he
says have been built practically every
one has been built by either a city,
county or state. Private corporations
apparently do not pay Luten any roy
altieS.
He says that be believes that three
fourths of the concrete and steel
bridges in New York state are of his
design. He was told that an engineer,
connected with the state board of pub
lie works of New York state, had said
New York state paid no more atten-
ton to his patents thin did the Santa
Fe Railway company.
81 receive no royalties from the
state of New York, nor any of its
three state commissions, but when a
bridge of my design is built, the con-
tractor adds the royalty to the cost of
the bridge, and consequently the pub
lie does not know anything about it,
he said.
In discussing the decision rendered
against him by the federal district
court of Colorado, he read that part
of the decision in Which the court
said that his patents covered nothing
new or inventive, but admitted that
mechanical skill'' was shown in his
designs.
Shouldn't 1 be paid for my me-
chanical skill?' he asked. He admit
ted, however. that mechanical skip
was a poor thing upon which to base
a patent for inventive genius.