The talking machine world (Jan-Dec 1913)

Till] TALKING MACIIINU WORLD. 25 FROM OUR CHICAGO HEADQUARTERS— (Continued from page 24). own suburb whore 1 had boon fortunate enough to establish a new dealer. "One evening I dropped in his store to check things over and see how everything was going along. A woman came in while I was there and asked to hear some of the late records. A few minutes later a gentleman came in to iook at some other goods and saw the woman listening to the records. He said, in a tone loud enough so she could hear, that he didn't see how anybody could eel any enjoyment out of this talking machine proposition. "It seems he had heard one at a neighbor's house a little while ago, an old style machine in which the motor was noisy and the records all worn out, and of course it made a very Unfavorable impression on him. With such remarks being passed, the woman began to wonder herself if this was real music she was hearing and finally got up and left without buying any records. "This looked like a chance to me where I could accomplish a little missionary work, so I tackled the Victrola knocker. After talking with him a few minutes, 1 found thai he liked the best music, that be went up to Ravinia every night in the season, where be beard the best symphony orchestras, and this rag time popular melody stuff didn't appeal to him at all. "I got out the list of records this dealer had on baud and selected a few of the kind thai would appeal In him, wheeled out a Victrola XI, put on a liber needle, adjusted the doors so the tone was well modulated for the size of the room, and started the Victrola without saying anything further to him. "After listening to a few records, his ears pricking up more and more all the time, he jumped up enhusiastically, asking for a catalog and inquiring if he could hear such and such records. The dealer didn't happen to have these records in stock at the time, so I arranged to see that they were sent the next day, and also that a machine was delivered to his home for trial in his own music room. The result was not only a sale to this man, but to three of his neighbors, also, within a week." ENJOYABLE DANCE OF COLUMBIA CO.S CHICAGO FORCE. (Special to The Talking Machine World.) evening. In addition to a regular stringorchestra Chicago, 111., June 11, 1913. ' there was music from a grafonola grand, and so The accompanying photograph is one taken at a pronounced was the liking for the Columbia music dancing party which was given recently by the em that the musicians took many long rests and "let ployes of the Columbia Graphophone Co. at Douglas Park, Chicago. The dance was a big success, and the Columbia people and their friends had a most enjoyable the grafonola do the work." C. F. Baer was the master of ceremonies, and was assisted by W. W. Parsons, of the dictaphone department, and F. A. Tatner, in charge of stock. NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE IN PATENT LITIGATION. Supreme Court Lays Down Rules of Practice for Courts of Equity, with a View to Simplifying and Hastening Proceedings in Such Matters — New Time Allowances Provided and Other Details Considered That Will Interest Patentees. New rules of practice for the courts of equity of the United States have just been promulgated by the Supreme Court, which are considered revolutionary in their effects upon patent litigation. Briefly stated, a suit for infringement goes on the calendar for trial by the end of 110 days following the filing of the bill of complaint; demurrers and pleas are abolished; and cases must be tried in open court, testimony by deposition of witnesses being abolished, unless by order of the court, except that of expert witnesses, and, under a Federal statute which the rules of the court cannot override, of witnesses living more than 100 miles from the place of trial. Thus proceedings in equity are robbed of the almost endless possible complications which have sometimes kept litigation alive for years until a final decision was reached. The new rules are supposed to have had their inception in certain such cases tried in recent years, where the proceedings were so protracted and the volume of depositions so great that the printed transactions covered thousands of pages, calling forth the rebukes of judges. Those who have had experience with the trial of patent cases will be interested in the extreme simplicity of the bill of complaint and the answer, as laid down by the new rules, as follows : Hereafter it shall be sufficient that a bill in equity shall contain, in addition to the usual caption: 1. The full name, when known, of each plaintiff and If any party be under any disability the fact shall be stated, defendant, and the citizenship and residence ot each party. 2. A short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends. 3. A short and simple statement of the ultimate facts upon which the plaintiff asks relief, omitting any mere statement of evidence. i. If there are persons other than those named as defendants who appear to be proper parties; the bill should state why they are not made parties — as that they are not within the jurisdiction of the court or cannot be made parties without ousting the jurisdiction. 5. A statement of and prayer for any special relief pending the suit or on final hearing, which may be stated and sought in alternative forms. If special relief pending the suit be desired the bill should be verified by the oath of the plaintiff, or someone having knowledge of the facts upon which such relief is asked. If the defendant move to dismiss the bill or any part thereof, the motion may be set down for hearing by either party upon five days' notice, and, if it be denied, answer shall be filed within five days thereafter or a decree pro confesso entered. The defendant in his answer shall in short and simple terms set out his defence to each claim asserted by the bill, omitting any mere statement of evidence and avoiding any general denial of the averments of the bill, but specifically admitting or denying or explaining the facts upon which the plaintiff relies, unless the defendant is without knowledge, in which case he shall so state, such statement operating as a denial. Averments other than of value or amount of damage, it not denied, shall be deemed confessed except as against an infant, lunatic or oilier person nun compos and not under guardianship, but the answer may be amended, by leave of the court or judge, upon reasonable notice, so as to put any averment in issue, when justice requires it. The answer may state as many defenses, in the alternative, regardless of consistency, as the defendant deems essential to his defense. The answer must state in short and simple form any counter-claim arising out of the transaction which is the subject matter of the suit, and may, without crossbill, set out any set-off or counter-claim against the plaintiff which might be the subject of an independent suit in equity against him, and such set-off or counter-claim, so set up, shall have the same effect as a cross suit, so as to enable the court to pronounce a final judgment in the same suit both on the original and cross-claims. The new rules of practise will doubtless be received with favor in the manufacturing industries. Infringements should be less frequent, it is said. In the past many actions have been brought which have never come to trial. The records of the offices of clerks of court have been filled with cases long since abandoned by the plaintiffs, but still hanging over the heads of the defendants. These cases are now disappearing automatically. Others are being withdrawn voluntarily. The cause of the man with a slender purse will lose some of its handicap, in that ruinous delays, resulting from bringing into play one technicality after another, at great cost to both parties, will no longer be tolerated by the courts. The ad\antage of the services of skilled patent attorneys and experts will remain as before, of course. The rule governing the taking of testimony, which is considered essentially important in several ways, is as follows : In all trials in equity the testimony of witnesses shall be taken orally in open court, except as otherwise provided by statute or these rules. The court shall pass upon the admissibility of all evidence offered as in actions at law. When evidence is offered and excluded, and the party against whom the ruling is made excepts thereto at the time, the court shall take and report so much thereof, or make such a statement respecting it, as will clearly show the character of the evidence, the form in which it was offered, the objection made, the ruling, and the exception. If the appellate court shall be of opinion that the evidence should have been admitted, it shall not reverse the decree unless it be clearly of the opinion that material prejudice will result from an affirmance, in which event it shall direct such further steps as justice may require. Where testimony by deposition is permitted, the affidavits must be filed without delay, "those of the plaintiff within 60 days from the time the cause is at issue; those of the defendant within 30 days from the expiration of the time for the filing of plaintiff's depositions; and rebutting depositions by either party within 20 days after the time for taking original depositions expires." The court may direct that the testimony of expert witnesses, "whose testimony 'is directed to matters of opinion, be set forth in affidavits, but those of the plaintiff must be filed within 40 days after the cause is at issue; those of the defendant within 20 days after plaintiff's time has expired, and rebutting affidavits within 15 days after the time for filing original affidavits. Should the opposite party desire the production of the affiant (the expert) for crossexamination, the court shall, on motion, direct that such cross-examination and any re-examination take place before the court upon the trial, and unless the affiant is produced and submits to crossexamination and re-examination in compliance with such direction, his affidavit shall not be used as evidence in the cause." These instances are cited to demonstrate the effort of the Supreme Court to expedite and simplify the trial of cases. The rules apply to all other actions in equity, but the bearing is probably most important in litigation as to patents. SALTER FACTORY KEPT BUSY. (Special to The Talking Machine World.) Chicago, 111., June 10, 1913. The factory of the Salter Manufacturing Co. is more than usually busy these days despite the fact that with the summer months there approaches a period of comparative quiet in the cabinet line. Although a complete force is working continually the stock does not accumulate, which speaks well of the popularity of the Salter line.