Evening star., 1938-12-05
Monopoly
(Continued From First Page. J

WAS NauU, IL udQ IlCL OSeN lIllTlIlScQ
because 1t was on q two-cycle engine,
whereas motor car engines were
four r-cycle.
Inventions developed and pat
ented by the Ford Co. are dedicated
to public service" without fee or
restriction, Mr.. Ford told the COM
mittee.
Permission for use of such patent
ed processes Is freely given to any
body desiring to make actual use
of them. he added. Mr.. Ford was
accompanied to the stand by I.
Joseph Farley, patent attorney for
the company. and testified concur
rently with him.
"Our primary reason for taking
out patents is to protect ourselves,
Mr.. Ford explained.
I'VE have found 1t good policy to
cover new developments by patents.
Then we grant license for use OF
the patent to anybody who seeks
one.
so you charge fees?" Mr.. Cox
asked.
No"
Although Ford inventions fire.
quently have been applied by others
without request for or issuance of a
license, the witness said his concern
had brought legal action In no case
since 1909.
On the other hand, he said, 346
suits Of patent infringement have
been threatened against Ford, GO
actually have been pressed, but only
one judgment ever has been found
against the company in the court
Of last resort.
At least 95 per cent Of the patent
suits brought against Ford are filed
by persons not engaged in actual
manufacture of the article involved
1t was estimated by Mr.. Farley.
Employees who contribute inven-
tions conceived and executed In the
Ford plants and on company time
are not given extra fees, Mr.. Ford
said.
I'VE feel that these employees are
we'll paid and that their product
should be the possession of the COM
pany," he added.
Most Of our progress comes not
from patent-minded men but from
engineers who are more concerned
with doing a good jeb," it was fur
ther explained by Mr.. Farley.
AS 4 policy, Mr.. Ford said, the
company does not seek licenses to
manufacture patented articles, pre-
ferring to leave the manufacturing
rights with the inventor.
Antitrust law enforcement must
be linked to the successful opera
ton of our economic system rather
than used blindly to disturb the
efficiency Of mass production or to
upset orderly marketing conditions
the committee was informed in q
statement prepared by Thurman
Arnold, head of the antitrust di-
vision OF the Department Of Justice
A departmental member of the
committee, Mr.. Arnold took the oc-
casion to clarity and defend the
antitrust laws and Government
policy against such restraints OF
trade as unreasonably hamper the
free flow Of goods in commerce at
competitive prices"
Such policy, he explained, "is
based upon the assumption that free
and Independent enterprise is able
to distribute goods with efficiency,
provided that small groups without
public responsibility are prevented
from eliminating competition and
exercising arbitrary power over
prices and distribution.
Ideal Often Sabotaged.
This basic ideal is often sabo-
tagged by disorting it into q state
ment that mere bigness is in itself
an evil under all circumstances,
and by implying that We seek to
pursue trust-busting as an end in
itself rather than as an instrument
to remove obstacles to the full use
Of capacity"
III industry cannot bring its
prices within the reach of purchas-
ing power" Mr.. Arnold warned, 1T
Is dimcult to see how industrial
activity can be maintained without
Government spending"
One OF the objectives Of the pres
ent inquiry, he added, will be to
examine "how the antitrust laws
may have . constructive appNca-
ton. through consent DEGREES and
systematic cooperation with leg
islattve committees, in cases where
certain combinations may be found
In the public interest"
Start With Patents.
4AlActi00 az tia nrnafA,4t lA0s A. .