Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

right to make them by the same process or machinery he had been before using. (Troy Iron and Nail Factory v. Corning, 14 How., 193; reversing, S. C., 1 Blatchf., 467.) Where a patentee granted to V the exclusive right to construct and use and vend, within a certain territory, ten planing, tongueing, and grooving machines, and the grant declared that V was to enjoy an exclusive use of the patent within said territory, limited to said ten machines, and afterward the patentee granted to K the exclusive right under the patent of making, using, and vending within the same territory molding planing machines: held, that the grant first made to V conveyed the entire interest of the patentee, and that the subsequent grant to K was void. (Ritter v. Serrell, 2 Blatchf., 379.) To an action of covenant upon an agreement, which granted a license to make and vend a patented article, the licensee agreeing to keep an account of the articles manufactured and to pay a fixed price per pound on those sold, it is no defense that the patent is invalid. (Wilder v. Adams, 2 Wood. & Minot, 329.)

[merged small][ocr errors]

In consideration of $50, to be paid by the firm of Simpson, Jenks & Co., of Huntsville, Alabama, I do hereby license and empower the said Simpson, Jenks & Co. to manufacture, at a single foundery and machine shop in said Huntsville, and in no other place or places, the improvements in cottonseed planters, for which letters patent of the United States, No. 71,846, were granted to me November 13, 1868, and to sell the machines so manufactured throughout the United States to the full end of the term for which said letters patent are granted.

Witness my hand this 22d day of April, 1869.

[5-cent revenue stamp.]

JOEL NORCROSS.

24. LICENSE, Not exclusive, WITH ROYALTY.—

This agreement, made this 12th day of September, 1868, between Morrison White, party of the first part, and the Uniontown Agricultural Works,

party of the second part, witnesseth: That whereas letters patent of the United States for an improvement in horse-rakes were granted to the party of the first part, dated October 4, 1867; and whereas the party of the second part is desirous of manufacturing horse-rakes containing said patented improvement; now, therefore, the parties have agreed as follows:

I. The party of the first part hereby licenses and empowers the party of the second part to manufacture, subject to the conditions hereinafter named, at their factory in Uniontown, Maryland, and in no other place or places, to the end of the term for which said letters patent were granted, horse-rakes containing the patented improvements, and to sell the same within the United States.

II. The party of the second part agrees to make full and true returns to the party of the first part, under oath, upon the first days of July and January in each year, of all horse-rakes containing the patented improvements manufactured by them.

III. The party of the second part agrees to pay to the party of the first part $5, as a license fee upon every horse-rake manufactured by said party of the second part containing the patented improvements; provided, that if the said fee be paid upon the days provided herein for semi-annual returns, or within ten days thereafter, a discount of fifty per cent. shall be made from said fee for prompt payment.

IV. Upon failure of the party of the second part to make returns, or to make payment of license fees, as herein provided, for thirty days after the days herein named, the party of the first part may terminate this license by serving a written notice upon the party of the second part; but the party of the second part shall not thereby be discharged from any liability to the party of the first part for any license fees due at the time of the service of said notice.

In witness whereof the parties above named (the said Uniontown Agricultural Works, by its president) have hereunto set their hands this day and year first above written.

[5-cent revenue stamp.] 54*

MORRISON WHITE.

UNIONTOWN AGRICULTURAL WORKS,

By JABEZ REYNOLDS, President.

[blocks in formation]

25. ASSIGNMENTS OR TRANSFERS OF PATENTS SHOULD BE MADE BY DEED; that is, by a document or instrument in writing, on paper or parchment, and signed by the parties, sealed with their seals, and formally "delivered" as their "act and deed," like other deeds.

Assignments should contain such stipulations and provisos as the parties think desirable; they are in practice often restricted to the disposal of a share in the patent, such as a half, a third, a twentieth share, and so forth; but unless the deed stipulates how the patent is to be worked, it seems difficult to say what actual beneficial interest is thus conveyed, because coproprietorship in a patent does not seem to necessitate joint participation in profits. The proper course in such cases would appear to be to place the patent in trust, to be worked by the trustee or his agent for the benefit of all the creditors, in accordance with their respective shares.

26. PATENTEE MAY ASSIGN TO HIMSELF AND OTHERS.— As since the property-law amendment act, 22 and 23 Vict., cap. 35, sec. 21, the proprietor of personal property may assign to himself, or herself, and others, if such an arrangement be deemed suitable, the patentee can make an assignment in that manner, with stipulations

that he or she is to work the patent and pay over to the coproprietors their respective shares in the profits; or, under an assignment made in manner above stated, a receiver or manager may be appointed to work the patent and pay over the proceeds to the proprietors according to their respective shares. Sometimes assignments are clogged with a condition that the patentee shall be employed in carrying out the invention at a stipend to be paid by the assignees, and in such cases there are frequently stipulations that the patentee shall give his time to the carrying out of the invention; but according to the case of Stocker v. Wedderburn, 1857, (3 Kay & Johnson Reports, 393,) actual compliance with such a stipulation cannot be enforced by injunction, although it may tle those interested to damages for default. An assignment of a patent may be made by way of mortgage. Further, such assignment will be good when there is a stipulation that upon the happening of a stated event the patent shall thereupon become and be transferred. (Cartwright v. Amatt, 2 Davies's Patent Cases.)

enti

27. ASSIGNMENT BEFORE PATENT.-It not unfrequently happens that an inventor obtains pecuniary aid when applying for provisional protection, and in such case the party supplying the money wishes to have an assignment of the patent rights. The course then usually adopted is to have a memorandum of agreement prepared and signed by the parties, obliging the inventor to assign the patent as soon as it is obtained. For in such a case there seems to be a legal difficulty in the way of making a positive assignment to take effect upon the event of the grant of the patent being made, because the inventor has then no potential position with regard to the property therein,

for it does not depend on him whether it ever will be granted, but on the golition of the Crown. There are, however, several law cases which imply that, although in strict law no proper assignment can be made before the patent is granted, yet if the person assigning receive the consideration for the contract, and afterwards become possessed of the property, the court of chancery will compel him to perform the contract; and it appears that chancery will enforce the specific performance of an agreement by injunction, even where the payment of the purchase-money is all that is required. (Cogent v. Gibson, 33 Bearan Reports, 557, 1864; Reeve v. Whitmore, 12 Weekly Reporter, 113.) But the words must be clear in order to pass the property, per Lord Chancellor Westbury. (Holroyd v. Marshall, 9 Jurist Reports, 213, 1863.)

28. LICENSE.-A patentee may license others to make, use, exercise, and vend the said invention, still retaining the property in the patent to himself, even when such license may affect the whole term of the patent and the whole extent of territory for which it is granted. This is a sole and exclusive license; but licenses may be sole and exclusive with regard to a certain district or place, or they may be simple licenses to use, exercise, and vend, either limited as to place or district, or not, in which cases of simple licenses other licenses may be granted to other parties, the only effect of such simple licenses being to free the licenses from any action or proceeding for infringement.

29. FORM OF WORDS REQUIRED.-It is the proper and safe course to make the license by deed, especially in cases where sums of money as royalty payments may be stip

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »