Brief for the United States (1914)

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 #:
000124
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
{"Media History Digital Library","Richard Koszarski",Domitor}
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
November 08, 2023
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.

112 PART VII. Q. You had no regard for the patent rights of others ? A. We did not. Q. The Edison Company had no regard for the patent rights of others ? A. Apparently not. Q. As a matter of fact, prior to the formation of the Patents Company, you claimed that you did have a right to sell these films, didn't you? A. We claimed that we had a right on the ground that the patents covering the films were invalid. Q. This statement and this contention which you make now to-day, as to the lawfulness of your business, as conducted by you prior to the formation of the Patents Company, that statement which you now make is directly contrary to the statement which you made prior to the formation of the Patents Company, is it not ? A. I do not see that it is. I say now that we did business openly in defiance of the patents known to exist. I said then that we claimed that those patents were not valid, and we hoped to upset them in the courts, but that did not deter us from going on and doing business in the meantime. That, I believe, is the common rule of business with patents. Q. Well, is there a common rule in business, as far as your experience goes relating to patents, for there to be this wilful disregard of the patent rights of others, which you have testified to were the prevailing con