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

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 #:
00058
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.

02 And again the court regarded the picture film claim as (11-1 Fed., 925) obviously an attempt by the patentee to obtain a monopoly of the product of the apparatus described in the patent. The court held that the product, that is to say, the article of manufacture, must be judged by itself, by its own inherent characteristics, and that it must itself, as an article, be new in a patentable sense; that the picture film was not new unless in length, which was a matter of degree, and that the other characteristics of the product were new only in the sense of greater accuracy of detail, etc., and that a picture film having these characteristics was not new in the sense that its production involved invention over and above that involved in the production of the camera. In dealing with the camera claims 1, 2, and 3, and the camera invention, the court intimated that Edison had probably made a real invention in the organization of the feeding mechanism of the camera, but held that the claims before it did not cover that invention. In the matter of claim 5 and the picture film, however, the court gave no such intimation. On the contrary, its discussion and impeachment of claim 5 went to the whole substance of the alleged picture-film invention. The contrast is striking in this regard between the treatment by the court of the alleged camera