Document: 343 U.S. 444 72 S.Ct. 838 96 L.Ed. 1063 BESSER MFG. CO. et al.v.UNITED STATES. No. 230. Argued April 21, 1952. Decided May 26, Mr. Carl R. Henry, Alpena, Mich., for appellants. Marcus A. Hollabaugh, Washington, D.C., appellee. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The United States brought this civil action under § 4 Sherman Act charging appellants and others with conspiring to restrain monopolize interstate commerce in concrete block-making machinery violation §§ 2 Act, monopolizing attempting same industry Act.1 defendants below were Stearns Manufacturing Company, second largest producer country machines, Besser country's dominant such substantial stockholder Jesse H. Besser, long-time president virtually sole two individuals, Gelbman Andrus, co-owners certain important patents machine field. 3 District Court Eastern Michigan found Government's charges clearly proved, entered a judgment intended correct violations exist.2 Only Company have appealed, bringing their case here directly.3 5 Appellants assert that factual conclusions trial court are erroneous. recently we reiterated narrow scope review respect issues fact antitrust cases. v. Oregon State Medical Society, 326, 690. In think it enough say judge conspired they monopolized attempted overwhelmingly supported by evidence. Not slightest ground appears concluding judge's findings 'clearly erroneous.' Rule 52(a), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., 28 U.S.C.A. 6 We turn now provisions which attacked It is unnecessary us appellants' activities detail, adequately set out below. Suffice sought eliminate competition through outright purchase competitors strict patent-licensing arrangements patent owners, Andrus. 7 contend requiring them issue licenses on fair royalty basis grant existing lessees machines an option, terms 'mutually satisfactory parties concerned,' (1) terminate lease, (2) continue or (3) leased punitive, confiscatory inappropriate. 8 However, compulsory licensing well-recognized remedy where abuses proved actions required effective relief. Hartford-Empire Co. States, 323 386, 413, 417—418, 65 373, 387, 388—389, 89 322; National Lead Co., 332 319, 338, 67 1634, 1643, 91 2077; Gypsum 340 76, 94, 71 160, 172, 95 89. 9 sale provision judgment, strenuously attacked, likewise recognized remedy. International Salt 392, 398—399, 68 12, 16, 92 20. That must be considered conjunction alternatives associated it. left free lease rather than sell if can make sufficiently attractive. 10 further argue method adopted fixing reasonable rates deprives property without due process law. directed Government each select persons serve as arbitrators committee establish form contents contracts. was also provided event stalemate four representatives should choose fifth vote break deadlock. If could not agree representative, sit appoint another person his place. After some delay, protest, appointed representatives, having its shortly after plan had been promulgated court. selected taken from industry, noting serving own behalf agents other prospective licensees, Department Justice. 11 When impasse reached regard patents, stepped arbitrator voted proposed government-appointed representatives. assail procedure contention royalties 'made judicial proceedings based hearing evaluation evidence light appropriate criteria.' 12 Appellants' argument fails counts. First, necessarily attacks sufficiency evidentiary material arriving at finally established. do pass matters character absence glaring error shown here. Secondly, appear misunderstood true nature what done, always within power rates, and, voting he did, did just that. They either held full himself referred master hearing. not, however, reducing decree measures procedures mandatory. innovation aspects, but novelty synonymous error. 13 framing relief cases, range discretion rests judge. supra, page 1643; pages 400—401, 405, 17, 19; Crescent Amusement 173, 185, 254, 260, 160. see no abuse Compulsory patented devices remedies. would seem particularly where, here, penchant rights demonstrated. With establishing acting vested '(The Court) provide determination instance failure approved any discretion.' (Italics added.) 172. entirely fair. A competent relevant judge, adduced before committee, resolved deadlock into negotiations fallen. 14 Although condemning royalty-setting used indicates faint enthusiasm it, suggests consider outlined direct utilized hereafter remaining litigation. exceed our appellate functions adopt suggestion case. 'The decrees take place Appellate Courts.' 400, 17; 260. 15 examined contentions concluded merit. 16 accordance foregoing, affirmed. 17 Affirmed. 18 CLARK took part consideration decision 26 Stat. 209, amended, U.S.C. 4, 4: several district courts invested jurisdiction prevent sections title; shall duty attorneys respective districts, direction Attorney General, institute equity violations. * *' 1, 1: 'Every contract, combination trust otherwise, conspiracy, restraint trade among declared illegal *.' 2, 2: who monopolize, attempt combine conspire persons, deemed guilty misdemeanor F.Supp. 304. Pursuant Expediting 1903, 32 823, 29, 29.

Category: 7