Digest of Decisions of Law and Practice in the Patent Office and the United States and State Courts in Patents, Trade-Marks, Copyrights, and Labels, 1886-1898 (Classic Reprint)


Book Description

Excerpt from Digest of Decisions of Law and Practice in the Patent Office and the United States and State Courts in Patents, Trade-Marks, Copyrights, and Labels, 1886-1898 Although previous digests have been restricted to the decisions of the Com missioner of Patents alone, or to those of the courts alone, the expediency and even desirability of covering both in one volume, and under the same titles, as in the present case, is believed to need neither argument nor apology. The period covered is a most interesting and important one in patent, trade mark, and copyright practice. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.







Digest of Decisions of Law and Practice


Book Description

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.










The United States Catalog


Book Description




Digest of Decisions of Law and Practice; in the Patent Office and the United States and State Courts in Patents, Trade-Marks, Copyrights, and Labels


Book Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 edition. Excerpt: ...the operative machine. Glidden v. Noble, 71 O. G. 141, C. D. 1895. 393. Ecaubert (Letters Patent No. 434,539, dated August 19, 1890) having abandoned any attempt to make his idea practically available and to develop his theory in fact, while Hofmann (Letters Patent No. 435,835, dated September 2, 1890) conceived the idea, embodied it in means by which it could be carried out, and proceeded to make watch-case centers, and thereby first perfected it, is entitled to be recognized as the real inventor. (Agawam Co. v. Jordan, 7 Wall. 583; Whitely v. Swayne, id. 687; Reed v. Cutter, 1 Story, 590; Howe v. Underwood, 1 Fish. 166.) Appleton v. Ecaubert, 71 O. G. 1617, C. D. 1895. 394. C. and L. both had the intellectual conception of the invention independently of each other. L. left his thought m abeyance in the presence of the activities of C. in reducing it to tangible form and incorporating it into a car. L. did not proceed promptly after learning that C. had obtained a patent for the improvement, lie stood by and saw C. reduce the invention to practice without any claim to the invention or for remuneration. The reduction and invention were C's. La Flare v. Chase, 72 O. G. 741, C. D. 1895. 395. Doyle not only failed in his attempts to reduce the invention to practice, but also failed to exhibit any interest or faith in the trials of McRoberts which proved successful. The neglectful conduct of Doyle after his attempts and his failure to establish his contention that McRoberts had been carrying out the invention of Doyle and the clear proofs of McRoberts, the patentee, entitle him to an award of priority. Doyle v. McRoberts, 73 O. G. 139, C. D. 1895. 396. Carty in his preliminary statement says "that he reduced the same to practice in part...




Trademark and Unfair Competition Conflicts


Book Description

This book will be of interest for all jurists doing research and working practically in intellectual property law and international economic law. It should be an element of the base stock for every law school library and specialized law firm. This title is available as Open Access.







Decisions of the Commissioner of Patents and of the United States Courts in Patent and Trade-mark and Copyright Cases


Book Description

"Compiled from Official gazette. Beginning with 1876, the volumes have included also decisions of United States courts, decisions of Secretary of Interior, opinions of Attorney-General, and important decisions of state courts in relation to patents, trade-marks, etc. 1869-94, not in Congressional set." Checklist of U. S. public documents, 1789-1909, p. 530.