system such as has been in force in this country. The monopoly granted by our patent system is absolute without requiring further consideration other than the disclosure for which the patent is granted. Obviously, to have such a system in which plant and animal life is involved would be the granting of patents for the use of natural powers and would undoubtedly be of little or no help in promoting progress along those lines. In all probability if a system for protection can be evolved, it will be very beneficial to those engaged in the plant propagating and animal breeding fields, and such a system would apply equally as well to compensate for the discoveries referred to in the quotations from the decisions cited. PERIODICAL ARTICLES. Some Russian Patent Provisions. Oesterreichische Patentblatt, Jahr. 25, No. 4, 1923, p. 34. As far as can be officially determined, the following decisions and laws of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic must be taken into consideration for matters relating to "industrial property." The law of May 22, 1922, No. 423, published in the "Isvjestia" of June 18, 1922, No. 134, concerning private property rights of Russians and foreigners, mentions the introduction of patent, trade-mark and design rights as well as author rights, but carrying out this idea is left to special laws. According to point III of this law, private property rights can be acquired by legal persons. Foreign companies, associations, etc., will be recognized as legal persons only when they have been registered by the proper authorities (at present, the Komwnutorg Commission for regulation of Interior Trade). Point V of the law mentioned expressly excludes the reversion of rights to properties that were appropriated for revolutionary purposes up to the time of the publication of the law. The laws of industrial and author rights to be made on the basis of this law will probably be applicable to foreigners only on the basis of reciprocity. At present the following decisions are in effect with regard to the protection of inventions. 1. The decree of the Council of the Commission of the People, of June 30, 1919 (Isvjestia No. 144, of July 4, 1919; Collection of Laws of 1919, No. 34, p. 341). This decree abrogates all laws and decisions issued up to June 30, 1919, on rights of inventions. Its provisions in the main are: From June 30, 1919, every invention that has been recognized as useful by the Committee of Inventions, can be declared property of the State upon decision of the President of the Upper Economic Council of the People. The invention declared as property of the State, with the exception of those declared secret, can be used by every citizen after a special publication, with the observance of certain exact instructions in every separate case. Inventions which concern the defense of the nation or are of interest only to Russia, are declared secret by the special People's Commission. These inventions are not filed for patent in foreign countries, and their use is not permitted by unofficial organizations. Inventions are declared the property of the State upon the payment to the inventor of a tax-free indemnity, fixed with the agreement of the inventor, or lacking this, by the Office. The rights of the inventor as the originator of his invention, however, remain with him, and are acknowledged by a notice of authorship delivered to him by the Committee on Inventions. Applications on inventions made in the territory of the Russian Socialist Federal Republic must be filed in Russia before being filed in foreign countries. Filing is made only in the name of the actual inventor; filing and patent certificates are stamp and tax free. The rights of indigent and incapacitated relatives and of widows of deceased inventors are legislated for by general decisions contained in the decree concerning the suppression of the right of succession (Collection of laws of 1918, No. 34, p. 456; No. 46, p. 549), and in Sections 7 and 8 of the decree concerning scientific, artistic and similar creations (ibid. No. 76, p. 200). The Committee on Inventions of the Scientific and Technical Division of the Upper Economic Council of the People is authorized to act in all matters concerning inventors. 2. The decree of the Council of the Commission of the People, of June 13, 1921 (Isvjestia No. 134, of June 23, 1921, Collection of Laws, 1921, No. 51, p. 284), concerning the Patent Commission of the Upper Economic Council of the People for the question of the rights of foreign inventors in the Russian Socialist Federal Republic, and of Russian inventors in foreign countries. By this decree a commission was nominated in the Upper Economic Council which is to accomplish a number of tasks in the matter of protection of inventions, trademarks and designs; among others the organization of a board to establish communication with foreign inventors and for undertaking filing of the inventions of Russian inventors in foreign countries, and further study of the question of joining the International Union for the protection of industrial property. The Commission is to submit the result of its labors in the form of proposals and drafts of laws to the law-governing agencies of the Republic. Why Patents Procured in United States on Foreign Inventions Do Not Prove More Remunerative. H. C. KARLSON, Swedish-American Trade Journal, July, 1923, p. 218-23. Mr. Karlson's answer to the above implied question is "Primarily on account of the quality of the service received." In other words, the patent attorney, being human, must render the amount and quality of service for which he is paid, and if the foreign inventor is unwilling to appropriate sufficient funds to pay a good attorney to go into his particular case thoroughly and give it the attention it deserves, the patent finally issued is in many cases unlikely to be sufficiently comprehensive in claims, or definite enough to make it really saleable to the American manufacturer. • The matter of the time necessary for the attorney to spend in preparing a United States application for a foreign patent is of course further complicated by the difference in patent procedure in the various countries; it being, Mr. Karlson says, the foreign custom to take out a patent on functions; while in the United States the individual combination is the thing. This necessitates a great deal of work on the part of the attorney, as it is necessary to translate the foreign application from functional claims to structural. When insufficient money is allowed the attorney he cannot go into sufficient detail in the matter of structural claims, with the result that inadequate protection is likely to be secured. Furthermore, in the matter of amendments, something more than a perfunctory rewording to escape the Examiners' references is necessary if the resulting patent is to be valuable, and this requires intelligent cooperation between the Examiner and attorney, and that time which is money. Mr. Karlson devotes considerable space to sound advice on the reasons for making a good validity search. before going too far in the matter of a patent application, and concludes with some of the fundamental principles involved in patent royalties and sale. Inventors, Inventions and Patent Practice. CLAYTON L. JENKS, Chemical Age, June, 1923; July, 1923. Continuing his series of articles on patents and patent practice, written purposely in a light vein to popularize the subject and to teach inventors the little knowledge of patent practice that is required for their protection," Mr. Jenks gives his lay readers wholesome advice on making full disclosures of inventions. He does emphatically advise patenting all inventions, even if they are to be dedicated to the use of the public. A novel method for rewarding unselfish scientists is proposed, namely, that in case of the invention by a scientist of some article or process of great general interest and benefit, the Government, on petition of the inventor, grant patent rights without cost and hold the patent in trust, subject to the grant of a non-exclusive license to any manufacturer for a royalty of 5 per cent. of the gross sales receipts, payable through the government to the inventor. "This method would prevent fostering a monopoly and yet insure a reward to the inventor. It, at the same time, would give proper incentive to manufacturers to market the product, since their profits would be determined only by the usual conditions of business competition." In this connection Mr. Jenks reports the interesting fact that the Canadian Government has granted an annuity of $7,500 to Dr. S. F. Banting as a recognition of his discovery of the Insulin treatment of diabetes. Those of us who enjoy the lighter side of life will relish the witty parody on Lewis Carroll, prefacing the article of June, 1923, appearing on page 261, ending with this: "Decree: This fluid was in use |