Brief for the United States (1914)

Page scan 00037 from Brief for the United States

Record Details:

Title:
Brief for the United States
Date:
1914
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Government Printing Office. Office of the Public Printer
Volume:
Brief for the United States
Leaf #:
00037
Language:
English
Collection:
Books and Government & Law
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
{"Media History Digital Library","Richard Koszarski",Domitor}
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
June 06, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

I'Airr III. 25 and iii(l('j)('ii(l('iit I y ol' the |)nt('nt statutes; this ri^lit j to make, use, and sell the |)at('iit('(l dcx ice is a iiatui'al riuiit. '^Flic oidy i-ii^lit which tlic h'ttcrs pat ; cnt u"i"aiit is the ri<;ht to cxchuh' all oihci' jx-i'sons ; from making-, usiiii;-, oi* N'cndinii. the thinL;; patented without the ])erinission of the patentee. ]\Ir. Chief Justice Tiuiey said, in BlooDirr v. MrQHcirau ( 14 Ilowai'd, at ]). 548) : The frau('liis(^ whieli tlie ])atent grants consists altogetlier in the rii>-ht to exclude everyone from niakinc;, using, or vending the thing patented witli out the permission of the patentee. That is all that he obtains by the patent. Tn Patterson v. Kentucky (97 U. S., 501) Mr. Justice Harlan used the following language (p. 506) : The right to sell the Aurora oil was not derived from the letters patent, but it existed and could have been exercised before they were issued, unless it w^as prohibited by valid j local legislation. All which they primarily secure is the exclusive right in the discovery. This is an incorporeal right. This right to sell a patented article is subject to the police regulations of the State. In Patterson V. Kentucky (97 U. S., 501, 505) this court upheld 1 a statute of Kentucky w^hich prohibited the sale of ] patented oil which the State inspector had condemned as unsafe for illuminating purposes. The defendant asserted a right to sell the oil by virtue ^