3. Speedometers and parts thereof: a. Shafts and housings and connecting and attaching parts. c. Speedometer head and the parts thereof. 4. Windshield wipers and parts thereof, including the attaching parts. 5. Emergency Service Tools. D. Accessories and parts thereof: 1. Car heaters and parts thereof, including the connecting and attaching parts. a. Water heaters. b. Steam heaters. c. Hot air heaters. d. Electric heaters. 2. Bumpers and bumper stops and connecting and attaching parts. 4. Rear view mirrors and parts thereof. 5. Tire chains. 6. Miscellaneous Accessories: a. Antishimmy equipment. c. Accelerator pedals. d. Radiator ornaments. e. Running board plates. f. Running board moulding. g. Windshield and air vent screens. h. Spare tire locks. i. Splash guards. j. Traffic signal finders. k. Windshield wings. 1. License plate frame. E. Body fittings and attachments: 1. Wind lace or weather strip 3. Channel lace. 4. Curtain cords. 5. Assist cords. 6. Cowl boards. 7. Sun visors and the parts thereof. 8. Body hardware. 9. Body upholstery springs. 10. Floor boards. 11. Foot rail. 12. Auxiliary seats. 13. Ash receivers. SUPPLEMENTAL DATA BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY ON SHORT-TERM, MINOR, OR PETTY PATENTS [GEBRAUCHSMUSTER] Oscar Zeller, Das Gebrauchsmusterrecht. Berlin, 1936, 562 pages. German legal text on minor or petty patents. Emerson Stringham, Patents and Gebrauchsmuster in International Law. Washington, 1935, 538 pages. Two chapters of this book discuss the German law on petty patents. Great Britain, Board of Trade. Report of the Departmental Committee on the Patents and Designs Acts and Practice of the Patent Office. Presented by the President of the Board of Trade to Parliament by command of His Majesty, March 1931, 104 pages. Report of the Committee which revised the British patent law. Pages 81 to 86 contain the consideration of the proposal to introduce minor or petty patents, as a second class of patents. The proposal was rejected. W. S. Bleistein, The German Law on "Gebrauchsmuster." Journal of the Patent Office Society, February 1937, Volume 19, Pages 126 to 135. Description of the German law on the subject; includes changes introduced by the statute of May 5, 1936. G. Benjamin, Double Protection by Gebrauchsmuster. Journal of the Patent Office Society, December 1936, Volume 18, Pages 884 to 886. Note on a scheme practiced to prolong the monopoly of a petty patent under the German law. H. Schmidt, "40 Years D. R. G. M." Journal of the Patent Office Society, January 1932, Volume 14, Pages 22 to 24. Descriptive note of the German "petty patent" law. E. Stringham, Gebrauchsmuster are Patents. January 1931, Volume 13, Pages 26 to 30. Journal of the Patent Office Society, Note on the legal position of German "petty patents" as patents. F. Herzfeld and F. Hoffmann, German Patent and German D. R. G. M. Journal of the Patent Office Society, March 1928, Volume 10, Pages 199 to 205. Comparison of German petty patents with German major patents. The following letter was entered in the record on February 8, 1939 and is printed herewith in connection with Dr. Jewett's testimony. See text pp. 963, 968, 969, 971 and 976. United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: The purpose of this letter is to answer the two inquiries which were left with me the other day when I testified before your Committee; and also to submit for the record a few additional paragraphs discussing the long-life vacuum tube. At the outset, I should like to point out that in speaking from memory I inadvertently misstated the number of patents and inventions which the Bell System owns. The number (15,000) which I gave is the total number which we were free to use as of 1934. The number owned as of that date was about 9,500-and naturally this is a number which varies from month to month because of new and expiring patents. As to the others, we held licenses to make and use. The first inquiry (by the Chairman) was: Do your cross-licensing agreements prevent you from making the 50,000hour tube for the radio field? The answer is that they do not. Our cross-license agreements do not prevent us from using any of our own inventions for any pupose whatever. Moreover, by those agreements we also gave to the General Electric Company, the Westinghouse Company and the Radio Corporation the right to use our inventions for the manufacture and sale of tubes for radio receiving sets as well as many other purposes. Those agreements, while leaving us free ourselves to license others for the purpose, also gave to those companies the right to license others under our inventions for receiving set tubes. Under the cross-license agreements, we ourselves are free to use the inventions of the three companies named in the manufacture of radio receiving set tubes-royalty-free for the first $1,000,000 worth, and on a royalty basis thereafter up to the amount of $2,000,000 worth. Actually we have not gone into the home receiving set or receiving tube business and only in other receiver business to a most limited extent. The Radio Cor poration has, I understand, licensed some dozen or fifteen other manufacturers to make radio tubes, under both its own and our inventions. The second inquiry (by Judge Davis) was: Does the Western Electric Company make available to independent telephone companies the long-life tubes used in your plant? The answer is that it does. For many years repeaters and one and three-channel carrier equipment utilizing such tubes have been available to independent connecting companies by lease from the Bell Associated Companies and, more recently, these equipments have been available by sale from the Western Électric Company. The quality of the tubes involved is the same as the tubes in our own plant. The actual release to the Western Electric Company under American Telephone and Telegraph Company patents is to sell to connecting telephone companies, railroads, power, oil and pipe line companies. We have never, so far as I know, declined a request for any such equipment from any independent telephone company. The foregoing gives the information which I promised the Committee I would supply to it. In addition, I should like to offer for the Committee's record the following few supplemental comments regarding the long-life vacuum tube. I suggest this because I believe that the record in its present form can be construed as a criticism of the radio industry-in fact, certain newspaper reports based upon my testimony have already implied as much. I should like to point out that the problem of designing vacuum tubes for use in telephone repeaters differs in important fundamental respects from the problem of designing tubes for radio-receiving sets. My regret, of course, is that I did not take time while testifying to make this perfectly clear, particularly as a very few words would have been sufficient to establish the fact. Although the radio tubes of the present day may be of considerably shorter life than our telephone repeater tubes, it does not follow that the radio tubes would be better suited to their work if they partook more of the character of telephone tubes. In the first place, the average radio set is itself a thing of relatively short life, perhaps four to six years, so that little or nothing would be gained by using in this set tubes whose normal life is eight to ten times the life of their associated equipment. Particularly would this be true if the longer-life tube represented any material increase in tube cost. In the present state of our knowledge, such longer life would definitely entail a greater cost. In the case of the telephone repeater the more expensive type of tube is amply justified, but for reasons which do not operate in the case of radio-receiving sets. In the first place, the telephone repeater forms part of a relatively expensive circuit connecting distant points. Because of this and within wide limits, the first cost of the telephone tubes is a very small quantity compared to the cost of the circuit of which they are a part. The cost of tube operation, however, is a most important consideration in the design of the telephone tube. Repeater tubes must operate uniformly and reliably twenty-four hours a day every day in the year and they have to be fed from storage batteries, a form of electrical energy costing several times as much per unit as lighting current. Hence, low current consumption in the telephone tube is essential; and it happens that we have been able to make long tube life a concomitant of low energy consumption. These exacting operating and service considerations do not obtain, apparently, in the design and manufacture of receiving set tubes. In the latter case the manufacturer is concerned with tubes of high quality, low initial cost, and life characteristics compatible with the life of the sets they serve. I believe that these requirements have been well met by the industry. In conclusion, let me point out again that to the extent that the long-life telephone tube is covered by patents, these are available to radio manufacturers through license. The engineering problem of the radio designer, however, has diverged from that of the telephone designer, with the result that each has developed a tube construction best suited to his industry. Trusting that it will be possible to incorporate this brief statement as a part of the Committee's record, I am. F. B. JEWETT, Vice President. Yours very truly, Attorneys, patent, criticism of.. Automotive Parts & Equipment Manufacturers Association. 1045-1049, 1060 997-999 Directorship.. Purpose... Automobiles, number in use.. Automobile Parts Industry: 1046 1060-1061 889 1052 1047-1051 1095 1058-1059 1068-1070 1078-1079 1064-1066 1047 Brake drums___ Competition. Gears, composition Marketing practices. Patents, effect on.. Products, schedule of. Research cost... Sales.. Wheels Baekeland, George E., Vice President, Bakelite Corporation.. 1053-1054 1077-1104 987, 995 1083-1084 1082 1081-1082 934-936 1113 987 978 842-843 948-978, 984, 1003 960 963 919, 921 1007 1071 1028-1030 British Postal Office.. British regulation of imports. Brownie Company. Bush, Vannevar, President, Carnegie Institution.. California Institute of Technology. Canadian patent system.... 1007-1028 956 1025-1026 1028-1030 864, 869-911, 969 982 I |