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 #:
000126
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.

114 PAET VII. (Govt. Ex. 173, II, 922-923, 924, fol. 2; III, 1669, fol. 3-1670) : The Show World. (AprU 4, 1908.) EDISON COUNSEL TALKS OF MOVING-PICTURE WAR. Orange^ N. J., March 28, — Prank L. Dyer, general counsel for the Edison Manufacturing Co., upon being asked by a Show World representative if he cared to make any further statement in reference to the movingpicture situation, said : "Mj attention has just been called to a statement issued by Mr. Kleine and appearing in the Show World of March 21. I have nothing to retract from my original characterization of the Latham patent as ' a Joke in the business.' The Latham patent was granted August 26, 1902, and, according to the people who are now affirming its validity, it has been infringed b}^ everyone since that time. Wliy was it not litigated to a final hearing as was done with the Edison camera patent? Obviously, because its original owners tliought so little of its validity that they did not care to incur the expense of a suit. I have been familiar with this patent ever since its issue, and a gentleman very closely coniK^cted with the corporation by which it was originally owned is a very close personal friend of mine. To oblige him, I