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 #:
000228
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:
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.

216 PART IX. The answer of the Patents Co. admits that the method of leasing films instead of selling them was adopted for the purpose of enabling the manufacturers to bring replevin actions, stating : ^^The sole reason for expressly framing the license agreements in the form of a lease was to facilitate the peremptory return of the articles by means of a Avrit of replevin in the event of a violation of the terms of the agreements." (Ans. Pat. Co., fols. 314-315.) The witness, Clapham, testified that Durant Church, a lawyer for the defendants in charge of the replevin suits, told him that these suits were being brought mostly to scare the people engaged in the business around through the country" (II, 1032, fol. 2), and "that the Patents Co. figured that they won out even if they lost a suit, on account of the publicity that they got through the suit, tliat the bringing of the suit was heralded broadcast, but that the termination of them — that they never knew what happened." (II, 1032, fol. 4.) When Clapham remarked that it cost an awful lot of money to keep the litigation up, Church replied that the exhibitors were paying for it. (II, 1032, fol. 4.) Clapham 's testimony in this regard was not contradicted or referred to by any of tlie witnesses for the defendants. Durant Church attended several of the hearings in this case, assisting the defendants therein. (II, 1033, fol. 3.)