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.
Petitioner's Exhibit No. 55. 3311
claims both for the camera and for the film to be void. Among1 other significant expressions in the opinion of the Court reported in Vol. 114 of the Federal Reporter, page 92G, occur the following:
"The photographic reproduction of moving objects, the production from the negatives of a series of pictures representing the successive stages of motion, and the presentation of them by an exhibiting apparatus to the eye of the spectator in such rapid sequence as to blend them together and give the effect of a single picture in which the objects are moving, had been accomplished long before Mr. Edison entered the field.
It is obvious that Mr. Edison was not a pioneer, in the large sense of the term, or in the more limited sense in which he would have been if he had also invented the film. He was not the inventor of the film. He was not the first inventor of apparatus capable of producing suitable negatives, taken from practically a single point of view, in single line sequence, upon a film like this."
After the first failure Mr. Edison surrendered his patent and it was later reissued in two divisions. In reissue Xo. 12,037, dated September 30, 1902, he obtained four claims of limited scope based on the camera shown in the original patent. In reissue No. 12,038, of the same date, he secured two limited claims to a film. Both of these reissued patents were put in suit against the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company in the latter part of the year 1902.
In the suit under the reissued patent for the film, the defendant filed a demurrer which resulted in the withdrawal of the action by Mr. Edison. No further suit has been brought against the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company under any patent for a film and no such suit has been pressed, so far as we are aware, against any other person or corporation during the past five years.
The suit under tin4 reissue1 for the camera, was carried through both the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York, where the bill was ordered dismissed, and through the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,