which registration is requested at the Office, may be consulted by the public volume by volume (Art. 37). The public may also, three months after the allowance, look through the specifications and drawings cited in the certificate and those relative to the deposit made abroad for the same invention for which the priority has been claimed, or to the patent secured abroad for which importation has been requested, by simple indication of the number of the patent and the name of owner (Art. 38).

In order to obtain copies or extracts, the application shall be presented regularly on stamped paper; and authentic copies, which the parties interested shall execute or have executed at their expense, extracts from the registers and certificates that the Office shall grant following request, shall be on stamped paper furnished by the applicant in conformity with the provisions of the corresponding law (Arts. 39 and 40).

The lists of patents, of prolongations, of completions and of assignments shall be published as heretofore in the Bolletino della Proprietà intellettuale and in the Gazzetta Ufficiale of the Kingdom (Art. 41).

In the said Bollettino shall also be published the sentences of annullment or of nullity of patents (Art. 42)..

The list of patents for which the annual tax has not been paid in time shall be from now on published in the Bollettino (Art. 43, par. 1).

The rectification of eventual errors contained shall be included in a successive list. However, since the inclusion in the list may stand as presumption of abrogation, but does not substitute the declaration of annulment of the patent, which is of prerogative of the judicial authority, it is established in the regulation that any one may request that action of annulment may be begun by the Office for the patents included in the list with the purpose of having definitely decided by competent authority whether these have ceased to be valid or not.

Of the decision that adjudges as yet valid a patent included in one of the said lists, there shall be given notice in one of the successive lists conjointly with the other rectifications.

I have thus indicated what are the most important modifications introduced from the new regulation into the rules in force for applications of the law concerning industrial patents, and I have explained briefly the motives of the modified or additional provisions.

I request that you may also give notice to those interested of the contents of the present circular and give me receipt of same.

(Signed) NITTI,

Minister.

United States.

Copyright. Act (Amendatory) of March 28, 1914.

(PUBLIC—No. 78–63D Congress.)

(H. R., 9897.)

An Act to amend Section twelve of the Act entitled "An Act to amend and consolidate the Acts respecting copyright," approved March fourth, nineteen hundred and nine.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section twelve of the Act entitled "An

Act to amend and consolidate the Acts respecting copyright," approved March fourth, nineteen hundred and nine, be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"Sec. 12. That after copyright has been secured by publication of the work with the notice of copyright as provided in section nine of this Act, there shall be promptly deposited in the copyright office or in the mail addressed to the register of copyrights, Washington, District of Columbia, two complete copies of the best edition thereof then published, or if the work is by an author who is a citizen or subject of a foreign state or nation and has been published in a foreign country, one complete copy of the best edition then published in such foreign country, which copies or copy, if the work be a book or periodical, shall have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing provisions specified in Section fifteen of this Act; or if such work be a contribution to a periodical, for which contribution special registration is requested, one copy of the issue or issues containing such contribution; or if the work is not reproduced in copies for sale there shall be deposited the copy, print, photograph, or other identifying reproduction provided by Section eleven of this Act, such copies or copy, print, photograph, or other reproduction to be accompanied in each case by a claim of copyright. No action or proceeding shall be maintained for infringement of copyright in any work until the provisions of this Act with respect to the deposit of copies and registration of such work shall have been complied with."

Sec. 2. That all Acts or parts of Acts in conflict with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed.

Approved, March 28, 1914.

United States.

Food and Drugs. Abatement of Prosecutions.

Procedure.

ABATEMENT OF PROSECUTIONS UNDER FOOD AND DRUGS ACT.

(Announcement of United States Department of Agriculture.)

The Secretary of Agriculture hereafter, in those cases where the department decides not to prosecute a manufacturer after he has been cited and has appeared for alleged violation of the food and drugs act, will give prompt notice to the parties interested.

The proceeding in cases where the department suspects that a manufacturer is violating the food and drugs act is to take samples of his product in interstate commerce and cite the manufacturer to a hearing. This preliminary hearing is wholly ex parte and confidential in nature, and evidence gathered in this manner is regarded as privileged. No information as to the hearing is made public. Heretofore, however, in cases where, after a hearing, the department decided not to prosecute and placed the matter in permanent abeyance, no notice to that effect has been sent to the manufacturer. As a result, manufacturers whose cases were abated could not know where they stood in the matter until the statute of limitations had run. This was equivalent to putting a flaw in their titles, and as a result such manufacturer would find difficulty in selling his business or borrowing money and was forced to do business under a cloud. Under the new plan the manufacturer will be immediately notified of the decision of the department not to prosecute on the basis of the particular sample taken in interstate shipment.

Placing a case in permanent abeyance, however, does not necessarily mean

that the manufacturer's goods have been found to be absolutely pure or are in any way approved by the Government. In many cases permanent abeyance results from the fact that there is a flaw in the evidence as to interstate shipment, that the intervening decision of the courts in other cases would make prosecution unsuccessful, that some amendment to the law adopted after taking the sample changed the legal aspect of the matter, or that it would be unprofitable to prosecute the case until the higher courts had ruled on parallel cases.

The abatement of the prosecution applies only to the particular article and the particular interstate shipment which was the basis of the hearing, and does not mean necessarily that the Government will not take additional samples and undertake a new proceeding or inquiry. Notice will simply mean that the particular case is no longer hanging over the manufacturer's head. This will clear his record under the food and drugs act in that particular case, but still leave him responsible under the food and drugs act for his goods in the future (Daily Consular and Trade Reports, March 5, 1914).

United States.

Industrial Property. Proposed Legislation.

1914.

Among the measures of importance to industrial property under consideration by the present Congress are the following:

S., 5044 (Owen): "To establish the Legislative Reference Bureau of the Library of Congress," providing for "a corps of experts in economic, political, and social science * * * whose duties shall be to place in proper form for use by legislators and other research workers the available reference material relating to the Federal, State, and municipal governments, etc." A separate document (S. Doc., 457) embodies the views of the Hon. Robert L. Owen, the author of the bill, and a further report of the Special Committee on Legislative Drafting (S. Doc., 262) gives the views of the American Bar Association, with much information of permanent value as to existing bureaus of the kind under consideration;

H. R., 13,305 (Stevens): "To prevent discrimination in prices and to provide for publicity of prices to dealers and to the public;"

H. R., 13,305 (Clapp), being an Amendment to the preceding, and for the same purpose;

H. R., 14,547 (O'Hair): “To prevent the use of the United States mail and all common carriers in interstate traffic in carrying, transporting, or conveying any wrtten or printed matter or other device for advertising, selling, delivering, or in any way disposing of any false or fraudulent cures for injuries, diseases, or physical ailments;"

H. R., 14,585 (Alexander): "To amend Sections forty-eight hundred and eighty-eight and forty-eight hundred and eighty-nine of the Revised Statutes relating to patents." In each section the words “and attested to by two witnesses" shall be omitted;

H. R., 14,749 (Lafferty): "To create an Interstate Trade Commission, to prohibit and prevent unfair competition, and to protect commerce against monopolies." The measure is of a complicated nature and pretends to embrace every present or threatened monopoly. Among these, “patent rights" are mentioned (Sec. 18, par. [i], sub. [d]) as being included for the purposes of this Act among the "natural bases." Sec. 20 provides that "whenever the commission (provided

by the Act) shall find that any corporation or association exercises substantially monopolistic power, based primarily on a natural base or natural bases as here'n defined, said commission shall issue and serve upon such corporation or association a written order to such corporation or association specifying such changes in the organization, conduct, or management of its property and business as in the opinion of the commission will most effectively and promptly terminate such monopolistic power, while at the same time safeguarding property rights and business efficiency, etc.;"

H. R., 14,865 (Campbell): “Suspending the patent and copyright laws of the United States when a patent or copyright or any article or product protected by patent or copyright is wholly owned, used, or leased by any trust or monopoly in violation of the Act of July second, eighteen hundred and ninety, entitled “An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies, and all Acts amendatory thereto;"

H. R., 15,401 (Palmer): "To prohibit the use of the name of any church, religious denomination, society, or association for purposes of trade and commerce;" and

H. R., 15,403 (Palmer): "Revising and amending the statutes relative to trade-marks," in accordance with the preceding measure.

United States Practice.

Patents. The "Film" Case.

THE GOODWIN FILM AND CAMERA Co.,

V.

EASTMAN KODAK CO.

After a pendency of over thirteen years this litigation has been brought to a close.

The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit having affirmed the opinion of the Court below sustaining the patent and finding infringement it is understood that a financial settlement satisfactory to both parties was reached and the delay and expense of an accounting before a Master thus avoided, the defendants taking a license under the patent.

The history of the case shows that the application for the patent in suit, was filed in May, 1887, and that the patent containing claims to both process and article issued September 13, 1898, under the No. 610,861 to Hannibal Goodwin.

Goodwin attempted to manufacture with the aid of friends, but, a few days after the building of a small factory was finished, he met with an accident which resulted in his death. This compelled other arrangements and the complainant company took up the management of the patent and business.

In December, 1902, suit was commenced against the Eastman Kodak Company upon the patent after notice given of infringement.

This proceeding was met by counter litigation under the Turner patent for the well known cartridge spool owned by Eastman, which resulted in a decision against the Eastman Kodak Company both by the Court below and the C. C. A. declaring the patent invalid.

The proceedings in the suit under the Goodwin patent having been suspended were then removed. The photographic art of the world appears to have

been ransacked for means of defence and innumerable chemical and photographic tests and experiments were made by both parties and finally in May, 1913, the case was argued before Judge Hazel at Buffalo on a most voluminous record, the oral argument of the case alone requiring four days.

Judge Hazel held the case until August 14, 1913, and then rendered a decision sustaining the contentions of complainant.

Although Judge Hazel's decision awarded an injunction to complainant, nevertheless, and in view of the large interest of the public in the matter, on defendant's undertaking to forthwith take the appeal and bring the case before the appellate tribunal at the first possible opportunity, complainant consented to temporarily suspend the issuance of the injunction until the decision by the Appellate Court.

The appeal was promptly perfected and was brought to hearing before Judges Lacombe, Coxe, and Ward, in the Circuit Court of Appeals on January 5, 1914; this as is well known to patent lawyers constitutes perhaps the strongest bench in the country qualified to pass upon such questions as are here presented.

After holding the case for approximately two months the C. C. A. rendered its unanimous opinion, which bears upon its face evidence of careful consideration of the issues presented, upholding the Goodwin patent both as to the article and as to the process, and affirming the Court below.

It may not be known to all our readers that the subject matter of the Goodwin patent is the article for which the photographic world had been clamoring for thirty years prior to Goodwin's invention, i. e., a transparent, flexible, nonabsorbent, non-contractile or expandible support for the sensitive emulsion, which should have not only the above stated qualities but also be neutral to the various sensitized emulsions employed, and neutral to all the photographic baths, and adapted to be rolled into small compass suitable for use in rollholders.

It will readily be appreciated that the discovery by Goodwin of the process by which this article could be made marked an epoch in the history of photography and forthwith all prior supports for the sensitized surface except glass plates which still have their use for some purposes, passed out of the market and this material took their place. If it had not been for Goodwin's discovery the entire cinematograph or moving picture art which today cuts such an important figure could never have existed.

For the report of the decision of Judge Hazel see 207 Fed. Rep., 351. The report of the decision of the C. C. A. has not appeared in the Federal Reporter up to this writing.

Patents.

EX PARTE, WHEARY.

Decided November 4, 1913.

APPLICATION-PROSECUTION-RESPONSIVE ACTION.

Where at the end of the year following a rejection a telegram was received stating that the reference did not show certain features of the claim and asking for a specific application of the references, which telegram was confirmed by a letter received a few days later, Held that in view of the record of the case the action was responsive and the application not abandoned.