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
In that trade I myself, shortly before my retiring from commerce, paid
£3,000 for a year’s right to use a new process, which proved unworkable,
and had to pay a _solatium_ of £1,000 for leave to discontinue it.
The agricultural interest should not remain indifferent. Mark what was
told the Commission by Mr. Reeve, Registrar to the Privy Council. In
Mr. Bovill’s Patent there was charged a royalty of 6d. a quarter on all
the corn ground in Great Britain by millers who thought it desirable to
adopt his plan. Obviously the royalty in that case had the effect of a
protective duty leviable for individual benefit, and enabling foreigners
to undersell in the British markets. And what title to this power had
Mr. Bovill? He was not the inventor. Another case is exhibited in the
following extract from a private letter with which I am favoured, from a
highly respectable quarter:—
“Patents have become so numerous and so various, that it is
not safe to use any piece of machinery, or make any variation
without first making a careful search to ascertain whether it
is not protected by a Patent. The Patent-Law has also been
the cause of much litigation, there being very few Patents of
any real worth but have had to go through the ordeal of the
Law Courts, and there can be little doubt that injustice has
frequently been done both to patentees and to the public. A
case of considerable hardship connected with our own trade
occurred regarding the application of the exhaust to grinding
purposes. It was clearly proved at the trial that the machine
for which the patentee claimed protection had been in public
use in Denmark, where it had been seen by a Glasgow miller,
who erected a similar machine on his premises in Glasgow,
but hastily threw it aside without putting it to a proper
test prior to the date of the Patent, but it was held that no
profitable use having been made of the machine by the Glasgow
miller, the Patent was good and perfectly protected. In our
opinion a Patent obtained in such circumstances should never
be allowed to stand, and if some means could be devised for
ascertaining the circumstances beforehand, it should never be
granted. The trade suffered very considerably in consequence
of this Patent being sustained, and the consequence was,
that although the patentee was not the original inventor, he
pocketed a very large sum of money.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account