outside the United Kingdom at the date of the application, but it was contended that satisfactory reasons had been given for non-use in the United Kingdom up to that time, and that, as to the future, arrangements had been made for manufacture to an adequate extent in this country. The arguments in support of this contention were (1) that D was entitled to a reasonable time to commence work in this country and that period had not been exceeded, (2) that the impossibility of getting the necessary machines for manufacture earlier was in any case a sufficient excuse for not commencing work at an earlier date, (3) that D had made all reasonable efforts to get such machines, and that in fulfillment of an agreement made between D and T the designs had, in fact, been assigned to D before the commencement of these proceedings, while the first two machines were delivered within a fortnight of the filing of the application, and (4) that there was, in fact, at the time of the hearing, adequate manufacture of the Design in the United Kingdom.

Held, by the Comptroller-General, that as regards design No. 615.469, there was no manufacture anywhere at the date of the application, and consequently the application failed, As regards design No. 614,643, although the design was used for manufacture exclusively outside the United Kingdom at the date of the Application, the proprietor of a Design was entitled to a reasonable time to commence working in the United Kingdom, and that as before the date of application arrangements had been made which, when completed, would result in an adequate manufacture of the Design in the United Kingdom, the proper Order was that the registration should be canceled, not forthwith, but six months from the date of the order, unless in the meantime it was shown to the Comptroller's satisfaction that the design was manufactured to an adequate extent in the United Kingdom. No costs were given to either side. [Syllabus from 31 The Illustrated Official Journal (Patents), 59].

Austria.

Patents of Addition. Acknowledgment of Dependency During Application Procedure. Decision.

Messrs. J. J. Ziffer and G. Wolf, of Vienna, favor us with the following observations on the public acknowledgment of the dependency of one patent upon another, resulting from a recent decision of the Austrian Patent Office:

According to the Austrian Patent Law-and in broad contrast to the custom prevailing in Germany-the proper court to decide the question as to whether one invention is dependent upon another prior invention, and the consequent public acknowledgment that the practical commercial application of the more recent invention is impossible without the suitable employment of the invention patented previously, is not the ordinary court of law, but the Patent Office itself, along with the judicial body appertaining thereto.

Now it has been an established rule that the owner of the prior patent may at any time whatsoever petition the Patent Office to render a decision in a matter of dependency (cf. Sec. 30 of the Patents Act) and the procedure as enacted before the Nullity Division of the Patent Office in first instance and before the judicial body of the Patent Office subsequently, completely corresponds to the procedure in vogue with respect to suits of revocation.

However, so far as it has been a question open to dispute as to whether the

owner of a prior patent was entitled to claim his right and obtain the public acknowledgment of the dependency of a patent about to be granted upon his own prior invention during the course of the procedure leading to the final grant of the said dependent patent.

As far as the law is concerned Sec. 58 of the same, while defining the various grounds that may justify an opposition being lodged to the grant of a patent, does not mention anything as to whether a degree of dependency constitutes such a reasonable cause for opposition.

On the other hand, Sec. 4 of the Patents Act, makes it incumbent upon the Application Division to give distinct utterance to a declaration of dependency if the practical application of a certain invention, for which a patent is being applied for, involves the partial or complete employment of an invention already patented.

This particular paragraph of the law distinctly provides that the patent applied for be granted only subject to the additional statement of its dependency upon the prior invention in question.

In view of this regulation there has never existed any real doubt as to the obligation which the Application Division is under to always define the dependency of one invention upon another if such exists. The only point which was not yet quite clear was whether the owner of the prior patent was entitled to obtain the acknowledgment of the dependency by means of a special petition.

It is in connection with this point that there has now been rendered a decision by the Appeal Division of the Patent Office which definitely settles this question.

According to this decision, the owner of a prior patent is entitled to petition for a public acknowledgment of the dependency upon his own prior invention of a patent about to be granted, from the very instant when the said dependent invention has been laid open for public inspection; and this petition may be filed wholly by itself or in connection with an opposition to the grant of the patent. In any case, however, it is incumbent upon the Application Division to render a decision in the matter of the dependency after a hearing, both parties being entitled to lodge an appeal from this decision as in any other case.

Uruguay.

Trade-Marks. Infringement. Who May Register. Decision.
Translation.

Registry and nullity of a mark-Whoever is not a merchant, manufacturer or an industrial, cannot have registered in his name a commercial or trade-mark. The deposit of a previously used commercial name, by him, who has no right to it, shall be annulled.

RESOLUTION: The registration of the mark “La Internacional" of Messrs. Franklin Henry Hooper shall be annulled, inscribing that presented by Mr. Howard R. Clark, denominated "Sociedad Internacional."

MINISTRY OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.

(Docket No. 112.)

Montevideo, October 21, 1913.

After a hearing, and Whereas: Mr. Howard R. Clark requested the registry

of the trade and commercial mark "Sociedad Internacional" for the purposes of distinguishing articles comprised in Categories I to IX, classes I to 79 inclusive;

Whereas: Mr. Franklin H. Hooper, opposes, alleging that said mark is similar

to that denominated "La Internacional," of which he is owner;

Whereas: In fact this latter was inscribed in favor of Hooper on October 3, 1912, to characterize articles of Categories IX, class 72;

Whereas: The Clark petition also asks the cancellation of this registration, as having been a violation of the legal formalities, as much for the reason that the applicant did not justify his existence as an industrial or merchant as for the reason that Art. 28 of the corresponding law declares that the name of an establishment, such as is the name "Sociedad Internacional," constitutes an industrial proprietorship protected by the same law;

Whereas: The cause, open to appeal for fifteen days, later extended to ninety at request of the plaintiff, this latter did not present anything in justificaion of his right to the mark.

Whereas: Summoned to inform the General Directorate of Direct Taxes concerning whether there was granted a license for the business of bookselling in favor of Franklin H. Cooper during the years 1910 to 1913, it answered in the negative.

Whereas: The Attorney General of the Government of the First District and the Chamber of Commerce advised the cancellation of the mark "La Internacional," and the registration of that called “Sociedad Internacional,” for it to be in accordance with the conclusions of these investigations;

Whereas: Each mark, being applied to the same class of articles, the coexistence of both would occasion confusion prejudicial to the interests of the plaintiff, who should have shown himself to possess a better right to the exclusive use of his own mark;

Since the grant of twelve folios shows that the Sociedad Internacional, in February of 1912, at least-that is to say, considerable time before the application for registry made by Hooper-carried on the business of bookselling.

Since, consequently, this name was known, in relation to said articles, at the taking up of the registration, in 1912, of the mark "La Internacional," and such being the case, the latter cannot be carried out legally, inasmuch as it is a question of words similar to a commercial name, comprehended in the prohibition contained in Art. 3, par. 11, of the Law of July 17, 1909;

Whereas, furthermore: There does not exist in this whole affair any assurance that Hooper may have justified himself as being an industrial or as a merchant, and inasmuch as, in any case, the absence of this quality is evidenced by the opinion of the Directorate of Taxes;

Whereas: This being an unavoidable prerequisite for the registration of national marks (Art. 15) its nonobservance invites nullity, since he alone acquires their ownership, who has fulfilled the requisites fixed by the law (Art. 4).

Whereas: The plaintiff has not presented any proof that the use of the mark "La Internacional" is prior to that of the "Sociedad Internacional," this a circumstance which strengthens the presumption, based on the aforesaid grant, that the Society cited has such preference.

For such reasons,

IT IS RESOLVED:

1. To annul the registration of the mark "La Internacional," granted in favor of Franklin Henry Hooper and to which reference has been made.

2. To register in the name of the Sociedad Internacional the mark composed of these words and which appear on folio I of this matter, on formalities which Mr. Clark will fulfill before the section respective of which the management of the Society exercises.

3. Let it be announced, recorded and published. Rubric of the President,

(From 14 Patentes y Marcas, 628.)

(Signed) BALTASAR BRUN.

France. Algiers.

Trade-Marks. "Red Cross" and "Geneva Cross." Law of July 24, 1913.

A law of July 24, 1913, relating to the prohibition of the use of the "Red Cross" mark contains, among others, the following provisions:

ART. I. In accordance with Art. 23 and 27 of the Geneva Convention of July 6, 1906, relating to the amelioration of the condition of the sick and wounded of armies in the field, the use of the genuine "Red Cross" mark on a white ground is reserved for all times for the protection and designation of the personnel, the material and establishments of the sanitary service of armies on land and on high sea as well as for the societies authorized officially to coöperate.

Pursuant to this provision, the use of the above cited genuine marks or designations, be it by private persons or parties, other than the previously mentioned societies or associations, is prohibited for all times, particularly so, for commercial purposes as marks of manufacture and trade.

ART. 2. The prohibitive clause contained in paragraph 2 of the preceding article is not applicable to the products of private industrial establishments designed exclusively for

(a) the supply of the sanitary service of armies on land or high sea, or of the societies and associations cited in the first paragraph of the preceding article, or, finally, of the ships and vehicles mentioned in the first paragraph of the succeeding Art. 6;

(b) the shipment into countries not having declared their adherence to Arts. 18, 23 and 27 of the Geneva Convention of July 6, 1906, or into countries to which the particular provisions of Art. 16 are not applicable. The list of these countries shall be prepared and kept up to date by way of notices to be published by the Minister of the Interior in the official journal and shall be in conformity with the import of the succeeding Art. 16, for the execution of which decrees will be issued.

A decree shall be issued within three months from the publication of this law, proposed by the Minister of Commerce and Trade of the Interior, of War and of the Navy, regulating the conditions under which the above provisions are applicable.

ART. 3. Regardless of the cases to which the succeeding Art. 5 is applicable, violations of Art. I shall be subject to a fine of from 50 to 100 Francs and to imprisonment of from sixteen days to two months, or to one or the other.

The removal of marks or designations employed in contravention of the

provisions of the two preceding articles shall be decreed by way of judgment or sentence. The removal of these marks or designations shall be carried into effect at the expense of the convicted party in the case that the said removal has not been effected.

ART. 12. The present law is applicable to Algiers.

ART. 13. Upon the proposal of the Minister for Foreign Affairs a decree for the Colonies shall be issued prescribing under what conditions and to what extent the application of Chapter I of the present law shall become effective in the French Consular Court Districts.

ART. 16. Upon the condition of reciprocity and at the suggestion of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, of War, of the Navy, or of Commerce and Industry, the provisions of the present law may be made applicable to the protection of such distinguishing marks as are employed in place of the genuine Red Cross mark and the words "Red Cross" and "Geneva Cross" by a Power having prescribed the restrictive use of said distinguishing marks prior to its ratification of the Geneva and Hague Conventions mentioned in the preceding articles or prior to its declaration of adherence to the same. It shall be stated in the said decree that the protection of the distinguishing Red Cross mark and of the marks employed by the respective Power in substitution thereof is secured through this Power from now on and already at the present time in the sense of the provisions of the cited Geneva and Hague Conventions as well as of the provisions of the present law.

ART. 17. The present law becomes effective three months after the publication of the decree provided for in Art. 2.

The provisions of paragraph 2 of Art. 1 of the present law shall only become effective three years from the publication thereof with regard to private parties, societies or associations who are able to furnish proof of prior use.

All former enactments, laws, decrees or rules are abrogated in so far as the same conflict with this law or with the provisions to be made applicable thereunder (Oesterreichisches Patentblatt, Dec. 15, 1913, p. 1257).

Trade-Marks.

Cuba.

Infringement Under the Convention.

Decision.

AN IMPORTANT DECISION.

President Menocal Reverses a Decree of the Secretary of Agriculture, Commerce and Labor.

President Menocal last Saturday, Mar. Ist, issued a decree reversing the recent decision of Secretary Nuñez, in whose department are filed the patents and the trade-marks and designs on patented articles, in which he corrected an abuse from which foreign manufacturers have been suffering for a number of years.

A firm of German manufacturers known as the Allgemeine Elektricitats Gesellschaft, manufactured an incandescent electric lamp made of drawn wire, which is quite well known in Cuba and has a large sale. A local firm, however, had tried to get possession of the trade-mark to place it on a substitute and to prevent the Allgemeine Elektricitats Gessellschaft people from selling their own product