United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others (1914)

Page scan 00052 from United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others

Record Details:

Title:
United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others
Date:
1914
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Government Printing Office
Volume:
United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others
Leaf #:
00052
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
August 01, 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.

46 granted. This was reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals with costs. In the case against the Mutoscope Company, which was the predecessor of the Biograph Company, the Armat Company obtained an injunction. The litigation with the Mutoscope Company was concluded in October, 1904 (Armat, IV, 2184, fol. 1), when the two executed the paper defendants' Exhibit No. 129 (IV, 2164, fol. 5), by which it was provided that the Biograph Company should withdraw its appeal from the injunction, but should pay no royalty to the Armat Company until the Armat patent had been sustained in the Edison suit in the Court of Appeals. As the injunction against the Edison Company was reversed, the Biograph Company never paid any royalty. (IV, 2184, fol 1.) Mr. Armat testified that the Edison Manufacturing Company were the chief offenders in infringing the patent. (IV, 2173, fol. 1.) On cross-examination he said the Armat Company never sold a single machine at any time or at any price. (IV, 2179, fol. 1.) He did not think there were any patent licenses by his company in use in the United States in December, 1908, although there were at least 5,000 or 6,000 theaters exhibiting motion pictures, all of which, according to him, were infringing his patent. The principal vendors of those projecting machines had been the Edison Manufacturing Company and the Powers Company. Those machines had been sold