The sun., 1919-09-01
pArENT OFFICE REFORM.
Objections to n Registration Plan In
stead Of tho Present system.

To THE EDITOR OF THE SuN-Sr: In
THE SUN of August Is there appeared
a letter written by A. Frederick Collins ON
the present patent system wherein he
advocated n return to the registration
system.
1 presume that Mr.. Collins will agree
that an examination system 80 perfected
that all of the patents issued are valid
and fully protect the inventors rights
is the ideal system. The result would
be that prospective infringers and the
public generally would come to look
upon a patent as substantially guar
anteed right Admitting the above
premises to be true It seems self-eWdent
that the nearer that perfection can be
approached the better 1t will be for all
concerned. the inventor, prospective In
fringer and the general public.
Mr.. Collins defined a patent issued
under the present system as a mere
scrap of paper" which means nothing.
and said that an infringer stands
about as good a chance Of winning in
court as the owner of the patent. Even
IL true. what Improvement would pure
registration system provide?
Even with the present inadequate
force fair share of litigated patents
are held valid and infringed by the
courts. and to that extent the inventors
monopolies have been correctly defined by
the Patent Office. Furthermore there is
to be considered the additional work
that a registration system would throw
upon tho courts. In that event every
litigated patent. including the portion of
patents whose monopolies would have
been correctly defined by the Patent
ONCE even under the present system,
would have to be defined by the courts.
To that extent the courts are now re-
lieved from consideration of numerous
claims which they would be obliged to
consider under a registration system.
On the question of invalid patents
Judge Learned Hand of New York. when
appearing recently before the House
Patent Committee, said that the courts
seldom disagree with the examiners
application of references, but that usu-
ally when the patents are held invalid it
Is because of references not found by
the examiner in his search. This Is
due to lack of time available to the
| examiner owing to an inadequate force
and to incomplete classification.
A return to the registration system
while 1t might reduce the cost Of obtain
Ing patent would result In greatly in
| creased court costs. Furthermore, how
would an interference proceeding be
instituted and terminated? Would in
references be declared between all CO.
pending applications claiming substan-
| TALLY the same invention? Such course
would result in a great increase of use
| less interferences. interferences based
upon claims unpatentable to all the
parties. II under registration system
| interferences would be confined as at
| present to patentable claims. n search
would have to be made either by Patent
| ONCE officials or by attorneys.
The inventors and public generally
had a costly experience with the regis
tration system established by the patent
act of 1898 and continued in force until
the act Of 1885.
] Speaking of the act of 1893 Thomas
| JEFFERSON said that instead of refusing
a patent in the first instance. as the
board was formerly authorized to do, the
| patent now issues of course, subject to
be declared void on such principles rs
should be established by the courts of
law. A previous refusal of a
patent would better guard our citizens
against harassment by lawsuits"
| AS result of the act of 1898 courts
were overwhelmed with litigation. This
evil. among others, led to the act of
1885. which act established the present
examination system.
| Roy F. LOWELL,
| Assistant Examiner United States
Patent Once.
| WASHINGTON, August 30.