Digest of American Cases Relating to Patents for Inventions and Copyrights from 1789 to 1862; Including Numerous Manuscript Cases, Decisions on Appeals from the Commissioners of Patents and the Opinions of the Attorneys General of the

Digest of American Cases Relating to Patents for Inventions and Copyrights from 1789 to 1862; Including Numerous Manuscript Cases, Decisions on Appeals from the Commissioners of Patents and the Opinions of the Attorneys General of the

By (author) 

List price: US$50.62

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

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. 1862 edition. Excerpt: ...v. James, _Pet., C. C., 480.--WasnINcToN, J.; Pa.,1817. But seepost 21. 5. The patent law requires an invention to be new and useful, but all that the law requires is that the invention should not be frivolous or injurious to the well-being, good policy, or sound morals of society. The word " useful" is used in contradistinction to mischievous or immoral. Whethef the invention be more or less useful is a circumstance of no importance to the public. Lowell v. Lewis, 1 Mas., 186.--Su'0RY. J.; Mass., 1817. 6. By useful invention is meant such a one as may be applied to some beneficial use in society, in contradistinction to an invention which is injurious to the morals, the health, or the good order of society. But it need not be of such general utility as to supersede all other inventions in practice to accomplish the same purpose. The law does not look to the degree of utility. Bedford v. Hunt, 1 Mas, 303.---STORY, J.; Mass., 1817.-7. An invention to entitle the inventor to a patent, must not only be useful, but it must also be new; it is a good defence in an action of infringement that the thing patented was not originally discovered by the patentee, but had been before discovered and put in actual use. I bid. 8. If the thing patented had been in use, or described in a public work, anterior to the supposed discovery of the patentee, his patent is void; and this although the patentee had no knowledge of such previous use or previous description; the law supposes he may have known it. Evans v. Eaton, 3 Vheat., 514.---Msnsnann, Ch. J.; Sup. Ct., 1818. 9. In respect to the utility of an invention, the law only requires that an invention should not be frivolous or injurious to the well-being, good policy, and sound morals of...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 380 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 20mm | 676g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236953460
  • 9781236953469