Recent discussions on the abolition of patents for inventions in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the Netherlands : $b Evidence, speeches, and papers in its favour
General
Recent discussions on the abolition of patents for inventions in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the Netherlands : $b Evidence, speeches, and papers in its favour
Patents
SPEECH OF MICHEL CHEVALIER, AT THE MEETING OF THE “SOCIÉTÉ D’ÉCONOMIE
POLITIQUE,” ON THE 5TH JUNE, 1869.
(From the June Number of the _Journal des Economistes_.)
M. MICHEL CHEVALIER, Senator, proposed to consider Patents in their
relation to freedom of labour [_la liberté du travail_], a corner-stone
of modern political economy, and to the principle of the law of property,
which is greatly respected by economists and which serves them as guide.
Does the principle of freedom of labour accommodate itself to that of
Patents? It may be doubted. All Patents constitute a monopoly; now, it is
indisputable that monopoly is the very negation of freedom of labour.
In the case of Patents, it is true, monopoly has a limited duration; but
in France this duration generally extends, if the Patent is worth it,
to fifteen years; which makes a long time in our day when the advances
of manufacturers are so rapid and so quickly succeed one another. A
hindrance or an obstacle which lasts fifteen years may greatly damage and
seriously compromise important interests.
It would be easy to exhibit by examples the extent and the importance of
these disadvantages.
In France the manufacturer to whom a new apparatus or a new machine is
offered is always in uncertainty whether the invention proposed is not
already the subject of some Patent, the property of a third party, in
which case he would be exposed to the annoyance of a law-suit at the
instance of this third party. It follows that he frequently hesitates
about adopting a machine, apparatus, or method of work, which would be an
advantage not only to the manufacturer, but to the community at large,
whom he might supply better and cheaper. Another case which occurs to us
is that of a manufacturer in whose factory an improvement has suggested
itself. He is forced to take out a Patent, and consequently to observe
formalities and undertake expenses with which he would rather dispense;
he is obliged, and becomes a patentee, whether he will or no; because,
if he did not, it might happen that the improvement might come under the
observation of one of the numerous class of Patent-hunters. This man
might take out a Patent, which is never refused to the first comer; and
once patented, he might annoy and exact damages from the manufacturer
with whom the invention, real or pretended, actually had its birth.
In France the annoyances which Patents may occasion are very serious.
It is well known that, by the French law, the patentee may seize not
only the factory of the maker, but also, wherever he may find it, the
machine or apparatus which he asserts to be a piracy of that for which he
has taken a Patent. He may take it away or put it under seal, which is
equivalent to forbidding the use of it. M. Michel Chevalier thinks that
this is a flagrant attack on the principle of the freedom of labour.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account