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
There are not two opinions on that point: the laws of all countries
condemn the man who enriches himself with what chance throws in his way.
But if a scientific man—seeking some impossible discovery, finds a clue
to an idea—meets with an interesting phenomenon—indicates, in some way,
new properties belonging to some bodies—announces the results of some new
chemical combination—it is only a scientific research. This or that other
skimmer of inventions can get a Patent for the application of the idea,
of the discovery, of the method; and the law guarantees his pretended
right not only against all reclamations of the scientific man who has
discovered the whole, but against the whole world, deprived of all
possibility of making use of the discoveries of science!
And not only the law forbids every one to use this or that produce,
except if made by the patentee, but it also prohibits the use of any
similar produce made by different means.
Then, to prevent all inventors to approach the ground that the patentee
has chosen, he takes immense care to have his Patent made of formulas so
wide and elastic, that all inventions in the same course of ideas will be
infringements in the eye of the law.
To these observations it is answered that industrialists or scientific
men are equal before the law, that all have an equal right to its
protection, but on the express condition that the invention be put in use.
We see very well where is the privilege of the chance patentee, who has
made the discovery of the scientific man his own, but we do not see where
is its justice or equality.
We see very well where is the privilege of the man who has had nothing to
do but to apply the idea deposited in a book by a scientific man—an idea
that, in fact, was at the disposal of the public, since the discoverer
did not claim its proprietorship; but we do not see why the law gives a
monopoly to him who has only borrowed that idea.
But we are told, the law is quite equitable, for it, says, “To every man
his due. The scientific man discovers a body, glory be to him. If he
will add to it some profit, let him indicate the properties that may be
used industrially, and let him take a Patent for his discovery. But he
must hurry, because if industry forestalls him, industry will get the
profit.”[6] It is exactly as if this was the law: A millionaire drops a
100-franc note. It will not make him much poorer. If he wants to get it
back, let him return where he came from and seek along the road. Let him
hurry, for if this note is found, he who will have got it may keep it.
Common sense and equity would join to say that when a scientific man
indicates a discovery or an invention, that invention or discovery
remains at the disposal of every one if the finder does not claim the
exclusive right to work it. But the law is different, and the results are
soon made apparent.
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