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 #:
00066
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:
December 21, 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.

60 fringers. And it may also be safely said that, at least until the patentee has established the validity of his patent and the fact of infringement, he will not be permitted by a court of equity, and at the suit of even one who may eventually be held to be an infringer, to engage in acts of unfair competition. (298:) Briefly, the Sherman Antitrust Act makes it unlawful to conspire in restraint of interstate trade, or to monopolize or attempt to monopolize the same. The Supreme Court have described a conspiracy as a combination of two or more persons, by concerted action, to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose, or some purpose not unlawful in itself, by criminal or unlawful means. The act does not expressly except articles infringing a patent, nor does it refer to such articles entering into interstate commerce and in actual competition with a patented article. It is lawful for a patentee to exclude such competition. The patent laws expressly provide that he may do so and how7 he shall do it, and even if the combination or agreement complained of were to accomplish even a lawful thing, namely, the monopoly a patentee may have, still, under the definition of a conspiracy, that may not be attained by unlawful means ; and if those unlawful means are in fact in restraint of competitive business actually a part of interstate commerce, then the patentee has