pBHa DO YOU KNOW YOUR ECONOMIC ABC'S? II~Z^ GG > ^ z2 *k -.. §> %) 4//s>j: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMM This booklet, prepared under the supervision of the Office of Public Affairs, draws upon eco- nomic information and resources available in the United States Department of Commerce. It is the fourth in the series "Do You Know Your Economic ABC's?" ^:°' c % %rTo*^ U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 1969 Revision For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Price 35 cents Do You Know Your Economic ABC's? PATENTS: SPUR TO AMERICAN PROGRESS A SIMPLIFIED EXPLANATION OF THE PATENT INCENTIVE AND HOW IT FUELS ECONOMIC GROWTH The United States patent system, which is as old as our Constitution, has a profound effect upon the lives of all Americans. It gives the creative among MnJITrilT OI/OTril us an opportunity to profit from their inventions; it K A I L.N I SYSTEM provides the foundation and means for industrial U I U I LITI growth through the continuous development and pro- Allft nnnilfTII tection of new products and processes. By stimulat- ANU uKuWTH m & i nnovat i° n > ^ brings employment for millions of our citizens and greater conveniences and com- forts for all. Today, more than ever before, economic and so- cial progress depend upon technological advance- ment. Our expanding needs call for a continuing parade of creative men like Morse, McCormick, Goodyear, Edison, and Carver to study accumulated technical knowledge, think about a problem, and bring forth new production process or products. In order to realize this steady flow of productive devel- opments, our Nation needs the patent process — the patent attorney or agent representing the inventor and the patent examiner. From this process and these men who make it work, American business enter- prise develops an idea into commercial reality. The patent system has been closely linked to our development from a small, struggling, agricultural nation to the foremost industrial society with the highest standard of living in the world. Much of the history of the country's economic growth could be written from the files of the U.S. Patent Office, an agency of the United States Depart- ment of Commerce charged with furthering the Nation's economic development and technological advancement. A glimpse at the past and the present of our patent system tells us much about how it can serve our future. I Secretary of Commerce AN ECONOMIC ABC PATENTS: SPUR TO AMERICAN PROGRESS How much is a good idea worth? Economically, it is generally reckoned in terms of the service which it renders. Such evaluation makes sense, for an idea shelved is certainly of little current value. What good, for example, would it do your husband John, your son David, and your daughter Joan if you did not put to use the recipes for nutritious food which you have collected? Take a look around your kitchen. Note the stove, the refrigerator, the sink, the cupboards, the floor covering. Back of every item in this room and indeed back of every item in your house lies an idea which has been put to use. And most of these ideas have come into use in your home — and in thousands and thousands of other homes and businesses throughout the United States — because of our country's patent system. THE PROMOTION OF GOOD IDEAS The Founders .of our Republic sought to pro- mote the use of good ideas to serve our citizens and consequently our country. This is evident by provisions written into two historic documents. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States includes this statement: "The Con- gress shall have Power ... To promote the prog- ress of Science and useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the ex- clusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." This provision of the Constitution — and the Constitution became effective as of March 4, 1789 — was implemented some thirteen months later by "An Act to Promote the Useful Arts", which was signed by President George Washington on April 10, 1790. From these legis- lative beginnings evolved the protection of the property rights of an inventor in the United States of America. Such protection gives the inventor certain ex- clusive rights over a legally specified period of time. These rights encourage him to develop his invention for commercial purposes. In so dis- closing his invention to the public, he may lay the groundwork for a chain reaction of inventive ideas. Innovation in a dozen fields may spring up. As a result he and many others who have been encouraged by the protection afforded by our patent system can and do contribute greatly to the Nation's scientific and technological growth. Further, if the inventor's patented product or process proves acceptable to the public, this period of protection may enable him to begin the building up of a business or even an entire industry which promotes the growth not only of the United States economy but that of the inter- national economy as well. Thus it is that patents spur our economy. PROGRESS STEMMING FROM GOOD IDEAS When we say that the patent system lies at the very heart of the economic progress in our country, what do we offer as evidence? For one thing, it is the protection offered by patents and trademarks that encourages private enterprise to invest in new research and product development, and it is on this investment founda- tion that whole industries are built. Charles F. Kettering, one of the country's leading indus- trialists and a distinguished inventor, illustrated this point when he said: "Industry has been very largely built up on inventions. Almost all in- dustries, whether they are manufacturing a patent- able article or not, have probably got their start by the use of either a patentable article or process for producing an article, or an improvement upon a patented process." When Chester Carlson, inventor of the Xerog- raphy process of electrostatic copying, received the Inventor of the Year Award for 1964 from the George Washington University's Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Research Institute, he commented on the role of research: "I am both grateful and humble in accepting this extraordi- nary honor. I am grateful because it signifies that the independent inventor is still recognized as an active force in American industrial life; and hum- ble when I consider the large part, perhaps a major part, that organized research played in bringing my invention to perfection!' He continued: "I would be remiss if I did not mention the large role played by others in the early development of Xerography — by many peo- ple at Battelle Memorial Institute and by many more at Xerox Corporation in doing the ingenious and painstaking work that brought eventual com- mercial success. "The time scale of invention is a long one. Results do not come quickly. Inventive develop- ments have to be measured in decades rather than years. It takes patience to stay with an idea through such a long period. In my case I am sure I would not have done so if it were not for the hope for eventual reward through the incen- tives offered by the patent system." It is obvious that the industries which our inventors and their patents bring about are respon- sible for the creation of jobs. Tens of millions of American workers can trace their jobs directly to inventions; almost no jobs can be found that are not due, in some measure, to patented inven- tions put to use in industry. The incomes resulting from these many jobs combine to form mass markets. Mass markets make possible mass production. Mass production results in lower prices, and these lower prices, in turn, invite mass consumption, with a continually rising standard of living. Such then is the evidence that the patent sys- tem lies at the heart of our Nation's economic progress. Examples will illustrate the point that virtually our entire industrial machine has been built under the stimulus that the United States patent system gives to the creation of intellectual property. The 1906 Wright Brothers' patent on their "flying machine" formed the basis for today's air- craft industry employing over half a million per- sons and having sales of $9 billion a year. The patented inventions of Samuel Morse and Alexander Graham Bell gave birth to the elec- tronic communications industry employing almost a million persons and having sales of over $15 billion a year. Today whole new industries spring up with spectacular suddenness on the basis of patents. Dr. Edwin H. Land's inventions of synthetic polar- izers and the polaroid camera have formed the basis for a whole new field of photography. The entire plastics industry is a recent development, and more than 90 percent of the drugs and phar- maceuticals in use today have been developed in the past two decades. The automobile industry employs thousands of people today, and yet it did not exist at the turn of the century, and there's the vacuum tube, the zipper, automatic transmis- sion and power steering, the gyrocompass, the self-winding wrist watch, the helicopter — each contributing its spur to economic progress. We're a nation of inventors, and it's no exagger- ation to say that almost the entire history of our scientific and technological society can be written from the files of the Patent Office. Since patents play such an important role in the economy of our country, let's take a look at the way patents come into being. UTILIZING GOOD IDEAS When we say, "That's perfectly patent", what do we. mean? We mean "That's evident, nothing hidden, nothing concealed". And that's where we get the literal meaning of the word patent: that which is "disclosed", that which is "open to public perusal". Let's see what this actually means. Pick up the stapler from John's desk and turn it over. There's something written on the bottom. It says: "PATENT NOS. 2,205,709; 2,312,142. OTHERS PENDING." And what does this mean? It indicates that at one time the inventor of this stapler sent to the U.S. Commissioner of Patents at the U. S. Patent Office, Department of Commerce, in Washington, D. C, a patent application in which he asked that "letters patent" be granted to him for the "im- provement in" his stapler invention. A detailed description and drawings of his invention were included in his application. His application papers also included an oath which stated that he believed himself to be "the original, first, and sole inven- tor" of the "improvement in" this stapler. That this patent application had been allowed by the U. S. Commissioner of Patents, acting un- der Federal law, is evident by the fact that the stapler carries a patent number: 2,205,709. That some improvement was later added and a second patent allowed is evident by the second number: 2,312,142. And that patent applications on other improvements were pending at the time John bought the stapler is evident by the notation: "OTHERS PENDING" Concurrently with the granting of the initial patent, and later, of the second patent, a printed copy of its detailed description and of its draw- ings was placed in the records of the Patent Office, where it was "disclosed"; that is, where it was made available for "public perusal". Such de- scriptive material is called the specification, and the specification plus the drawings is called the disclosure. At the same time a summary descrip- tion and one of the drawings of the new patented product or process was published in the Patent Office's weekly Official Gazette. But back of this brief account there lies an interesting story of many details; so — let's begin at the beginning. A BIT OF HISTORY The issuance of patents in our country actually dates back to colonial days — even before legal provision was made for them in the Constitution and in the 1790 "An Act to Promote the Progress of Useful Arts". In the colonies it was quite natural that the issuance of patents — which car- ried forward the English patent law traditions — would be focused on products and processes of a basic economic character. There were patents for the production of utility products: candles, can- vas, linseed oil, paper, pitch, soap. There were patents for the grinding of grain and the produc- tion of salt. And this practice continued under the new Federal Government. The very first United States patent which was issued under "An Act to Pro- mote the Progress of Useful Arts" was for the making of potash — a chemical used in the manu- facture of soap. This patent, issued on July 31, 1790, to Samuel Hopkins of Philadelphia, was duly signed by President George Washington and by two members of his cabinet : Attorney General Edmund Randolph and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson. The first patent act delegated complete power to grant patents to a board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Secretary of War, and the Attorney General. Since these three officials had much too much other work to do, they were unable to devote adequate time to this additional duty, and so on February 11, 1793, a new act placed the issuance of patents under the direction of the Secretary of State in the Department of State. Here it was that the Patent Office came into being as a distinct bureau in 1802. To obtain a patent under the 1793 act, however, there was no formal requirement other than submitting a description, drawings, a model, and the necessary fee. The applicant for a patent did not need to establish the "newness" of his invention. This system of issuing patents without any examination for novelty resulted in numerous conflicting patents, but it remained in force until 1836, when patents were being issued at the rate of some 600 a year and dissatisfaction had be- come widespread. To correct the situation, an act was passed on July 4, 1836, which — among other provisions — reintroduced the examining system which had been used under Jefferson and which called for novelty proof. Additionally, the act designated the officer in charge as Commissioner of Patents. This Act of 1836 was amended from time to time until in 1870, the patent law was completely rewritten. Thereafter some 60 acts relating to patents were passed. By an Act of Congress on July 19, 1952, an act which became effective on July 1, 1953, our patent laws were again revised — and codified, and it is under these provisions that the Patent Office currently operates. As to the Patent Office to which, over the years, all the many applications came, it remained under the jurisdiction of the State Department until March 3, 1849, when it was transferred to the newly created Department of the Interior. Here it remained until April 1, 1925, when it was transferred by Executive Order to the U.S. De- partment of Commerce. Among many detailed changes in patent law procedure, a Congressional Act of March 2, 1861, increased the term of a patent grant from 14 years to 17 years. But — let's take note of: WHAT CAN AND CANNOT BE PATENTED Some of the basic provisions of our patent law are worth noting. A patent may be granted to the inventor or to the discoverer of any new and use- ful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or "any new and useful improvement thereof." Let's take a look at some of these words, beginning with process. A new and useful process generally relates to a new and better method of performing an industrial or technical task, and as such it can be patented. The term machine is self-explanatory. The term manufacture includes all manufactured articles. The phrase composition of matter relates to chemical compositions and it may also include mixtures of ingredients as well as new chemical compounds. These four classes of subject matter taken together include practically everything which is made by man and the processes for making them. The term new means that the granting of a patent is prohibited on any invention which has been disclosed to the public — perhaps through a magazine article written by the inventor or by someone else, and published anywhere in the world — before the inventor completed his inven- tion or more than one year before he filed his application. The applicant must also be the first person to have made the invention "without abandoning, suppressing, or concealing" it. The term new also signifies that the granting of a patent is prohibited on any invention which has been in use or on sale in this country by the inventor or by anyone else for more than one year before the inventor's application was filed. The term useful rules out the granting or patents for such things as machines that do not run or which do not have at least some small measure of utility. Additionally, a patent may not be granted on printed matter, on a method of doing business, or on an improvement in a device which would be "obvious" to a person "skilled in the art". There is another area of exclusion. Of interest to many Americans is the fact that the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 excludes the patenting of inventions which are useful solely in the utilization of special nuclear material or of atomic energy for atomic weapons. Since 1842, the U. S. Patent Office has issued patents on designs. As a result, the ornamental features or outward appearance of a device or product can be protected entirely apart from its method of operation. Since 1930, patents on new varieties of plants, such as roses and carnations, have also been issued. Additionally, since 1870, the U. S. Patent Office has registered and pro- vided protection for trademarks, which are the distinguishing words, letters, or marks which characterize many products. WHAT IS A PATENT? But exactly what is a patent? The U. S. Patent Office defines it as a "grant issued by the United States Government giving an inventor the right to exclude all others from making, using, or sell- ing his invention within the United States, its territories, and possessions" for a specified num- ber of years. Except for patents on ornamental designs, which are granted for terms of 3 ] /2, 7, or 14 years, a patent is granted for a term of 17 years from the date on which it is issued. The term of a patent cannot be extended except by a special act of Congress, and this occurs very rarely and only in most exceptional circumstances. 1 Let's note the exact wording of the definition. Although technically it gives the inventor only the right to exclude others, as a practical matter it gives him a 17-year period of protection, unless in the opinion of the United States courts his patent cannot be exploited without infringing the legal rights of another. A patent is adjudged valid or invalid legally in accordance with the specific facts of each particular dispute as the court applies the law to them. Over the years a body of court interpretations has evolved from such decisions. PATENT APPLICATIONS With such a background as we've sketched, let's suppose that your husband John has designed and constructed a baby walker for the use of crippled children and wants to secure a patent for it. Because he knows little about patent procedure and because he has his hands full, managing his retail shoe store, what should he do? Any inventor may prepare his own application and file it with the U. S. Patent Office, but most inventors employ the services of patent attorneys or patent agents. And there is good reason for this. The preparation of a patent application and the subsequent filing proceedings require knowl- edge of patent law. The inventor may be thor- oughly knowledgeable about his invention from a technical and scientific point of view but at many points during the procedure of obtaining a patent, he could find himself at a disadvantage legally. For example, as a layman he could have no confi- dent assurance — even if his patent were granted — ' To date, the extension of only 38 single patents has been authorized by special acts of Congress, only one of which has been authorized in the 20th century. However, by special Congressional Act in 1928, extension was authorized for six patents of World War I veterans, and by special Congressional Acts of 1950 and 1952 extension was authorized for 113 patents of World War II veterans. that it would adequately protect his invention; and, of course, protection on his patented product or process is exactly what he is seeking. SELECTING A PATENT "GUIDE" Let's suppose then that John decides to engage the services of a patent attorney or a patent agent. Should he write the Patent Office asking for the name of a reliable person in the vicinity of your home town of Elmwood, Pennsylvania? Will the Patent Office recommend someone to him? The Patent Office, for obvious reasons, cannot recom- mend any particular attorney or agent nor can it aid in the selection of one. For instance, it can- not state, in answer to an inquiry, that a named attorney, agent, or firm is "reliable" or "capable." It does, however, issue a directory of all registered patent attorneys and agents who have indicated their ability to accept new clients. The listing is arranged alphabetically by states, cities, and also by foreign countries. 2 After an inventor consults this list, he must determine by his own investigation whom he wishes to employ. He can, of course, be certain that each person who has been registered by the U. S. Patent Office has been required to demon- strate that he is of good moral character, of good repute, and that he has the legal, scientific, and technical qualifications necessary to enable him to render valuable service. And if he, like John, is seeking a patent attorney or agent from Pennsyl- vania, currently he will find several pages of names and locations from which to choose. In many small towns of our country, however, there is no patent attorney. In such case, it may be necessary for the inventor and his chosen at- torney or agent to handle the patent application by mail. It goes without saying, however, that a personal contact is desirable, and in some cases, the most reliable method of choosing a capable man may be through a personal recommendation and particularly a recommendation by a family lawyer or trusted friend. But you've been waiting to ask a question: What is the difference between a patent attorney and a patent agent? Simply stated, a patent agent cannot conduct patent litigation in the courts or perform services which the local jurisdiction con- siders as law practice. However, insofar as the * In our bibliography, note Directory of Registered Patent Attorneys and Agents, Arranged by States and Countries. work of preparing a patent application is con- cerned and seeing it through its various stages — the Patent Office calls it "conducting the prosecu- tion" — the patent attorney and the patent agent are equally qualified. For purposes of illustration, let's suppose that when John consults his college friend, Herbert Edwards, who is a lawyer, he recommends a patent attorney whom he has known for several years and who lives a short distance away in the town of Wendell. His name is Ernest Williams and after John has met and talked with him, he decides to hire him. THE PLANNING BEGINS What now does Ernest Williams actually do? First, he learns exactly what John's invention is and helps him describe it in writing in proper technical terms. This description or specification, of which we spoke earlier, will probably be drafted several times until both John and his patent attorney are satisfied that it is meticulously correct. It must describe in full, clear, concise, and exact terms not only the invention itself but also the manner and the process of making and using it, so that, to paraphrase the Patent Statute: "any person skilled in the art to which the inven- tion pertains, or with which it is most clearly connected, can make and use the invention." This detailed description, and it may be quite long, must be preceded by a brief summary indicating the "nature and substance" of the invention. 3 The description or specification must be fol- lowed by one or more of what are called claims, and because these claims in great measure deter- mine the scope of protection for the invention, they are in a very real sense the operative part of the patent. And just what are claims? Simply stated, claims are all the essential features which distinguish the new invention from similar inven- tions which have been patented before. But how does Ernest Williams learn what has been previously patented in the area of baby walkers? There are three courses he might fol- low: 1) obtain copies of patents from the Patent Office — if he knows what he wants — 2) consult printed copies of U. S. patents arranged in numerical order in the Franklin Institute Library in Philadelphia or the Carnegie Library in Pitts- 14 ' Patent applications, of course, vary in length. Some are relatively short; others are very long. One patent granted in early I960 included 354 drawings and 266 pages of specifica- tions — a total of 620 pages! burgh (there are 22 such repositories in the United States), and 3) hire an experienced patent searcher to do the work for him in the U. S. Patent Office. However, let's suppose, for illustrative purposes, that Ernest Williams decides to come to Washing- ton himself to conduct a preliminary patent search in the Patent Office. If, during the search, he discovers in the public records a prior patent that has anticipated John's, there is, of course, no point in John's submitting a patent application. In such case, John's agreed-upon payment for the preliminary search has obviously saved him needless further expense. Let's then take a look at the mechanism of this research. Doing so will help you to answer at least some of the ever-recurring how and why questions that you and John have encouraged Joan and David to inject into family discussions. THE SEARCH ROOM The Patent Office maintains on the first floor of one of the new buildings it occupies at Crvstal Plaza, 2021 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia, a huge room open to the public for pat- ent searching. Here desks and chairs are provided for patent attorneys and agents, engineers, scien- tists, inventors, historians, students, the public — for anyone who wishes to search patent records. In adjoining "stack rooms" are copies of all U.S. patents granted since 1836. These are arranged and classified by subject matter. There is also a chronological arrangement of patents. On the mezzanine floor above the search room are shelved over 13,000 bound volumes of invention patents, numbered from 1 to 3,043,939, the latter having been issued on July 10, 1962. And where are the later ones? Because of space limitations, it has been necessary to place later numbered patents on microfilm, and it is in such form that they may be scanned by the public on film readers in the search room. A word about the numbering of patents. Al- though the Patent Office had issued some 10,252 patents from July 31, 1790 — when the first U. S. patent was granted — to July 4, 1836, none of them had been assigned a number. When the Congressional Act of July 4, 1836 established the Patent Office as a distinct and separate bureau in the Department of State under the Commis- sioner of Patents, it ordered — among other pro- visions — that from then on there should be kept a numerical register of all patents issued. On July 13, 1836, in keeping with the new provision, Patent No. 1 was issued to Senator John Ruggles of Maine on a locomotive steam engine for rail and other roads. It was "de- signed to give a multiplied tractive power to the locomotive and to prevent the evil of the sliding of the wheel." At this particular time in 1836, the Patent Office was housed, along with the Post Office Department, in crowded quarters and was looking forward to occupying its own building authorized by this act of July 4, 1836. But the tragedy of fire struck in the early morning hours of De- cember 15, 1836, and records, drawings, models, correspondence of American and European in- ventors — all were destroyed. Nothing was saved! Housed temporarily in the old City Hall, and aided on March 3, 1837, by a Congressional ap- propriation of $100,000, the Patent Office sought to replace as many records as it could. A com- mittee worked with United States Court clerks and with owners of patents, and as a result, some of the records were recovered and are today housed in the vaults of the Archives of the United States. It has been possible, therefore, for the Patent Office to make copies of these historically valuable documents. So much then for the actual numbering of patents, but how can such a system tell the patent attorney or searcher where he can learn about patents granted for baby walkers? Obviously, it cannot, unless he knows what particular numbers belong to these particular patents. What then does he do? PRELIMINARY SEARCH If a person starting in to make a patent search has not made recent searches in a kindred field, chances are he will consult in the search room the Patent Office's Index to Classification. In this volume, subject-matter headings are listed alpha- betically from abacus to zwieback. To appreciate the ingenuity of the system, let's look over Ernest Williams' shoulder as he turns the pages, search- ing for baby walkers. He pauses at page 21 and we see, interestingly enough, that the very first entry under B is Baby. We read down the al- phabetized sub-headings: bottle warmer, carriage, chairs, cradle, cribs, diapers, dining plates, fences, harness, incubators, jumpers (how important babies are!) pacifier, pen, rattles, rubber pants, safety garments, shoes — and there it is as the very last entry — walker. Some of these headings have sub-headings and this is true of the walker entry. Here's what it looks like: Walker 272 70+ Vehicle 280 87.2 With seat 297 5 + What do the numbers signify? The first group of numbers: 272, 280, and 297, gives the class number. The second group of numbers: 70, 87, and 5, gives the subclass number. This subclass number is often further subdivided by means of decimals, as in 87.2. What does the plus sign signify? It says to the searcher: "Better take a look not only at subclass 70, but also at 70.1, 70.2 — and so on. There may be something here." Ernest Williams copies down all these headings and their respective code numbers and then turns to the Patent Office's Manual of Classification. Unlike the Index to Classification, this volume is arranged not alphabetically but numerically. His, next step is to look at all the titles of the classes and subclass to see if they are pertinent, and if so, to list them for actual search purposes. Now with the outline of his search before him and with the knowledge that John's baby walker invention includes a seat, Ernest Williams decides to start his actual search reading by securing a the patents listed as "Walker — with seat" and coded as 297-5. CLASSIFIED PATENTS What now does he do? Because of the simple manner in which the patents are arranged in numbered packets in the stacks adjoining the search room (even though there are 310 classes and 64,000 sub-classes!), he is able rather promptly to find the packet or packets coded as 297-5. He takes the material to one of the desks in the search room, deposits it in the metal read- ing rack, and begins to peruse its contents. Each separate patent record within the packet is stamped with the code numrjer 297-5 and many of the records have stamped across their top: "CROSS REFERENCE." This insertion of cross-reference patent records (pertinent patents from other classes) in practically every packet indicates the care and the thoroughness with which the Patent Office works. The patents within each packet are arranged in chronological order, and in this case, we note that the first record begins with a sketch of a baby walker patented by E. Y. Robbins on De- cember 2, 1856. It is classified as No. 16,150 and is marked CROSS REFERENCE. Subsequent other patents in the class, and cross reference items, will be examined carefully by Ernest Williams to see whether they cover features that John has described in his proposed application. Patent searching is a very specialized activity and although theoretically John himself could "search" his own invention, in practice he will • save much time and money by having an expert do the job for him. How long the preliminary search will take, will, of course, depend upon the number of prior pa- tents involved. However, a competent searcher will examine every cross reference subclass which he feels is necessary and. will bring his search completely up to date by noting all pertinent fields covered in the most recent issues of the Official Gazette. THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE Publication of this fascinating weekly "paper- back" began on Tuesday, January 3, 1872. With the exception of two Tuesdays — July 17 and July 24, 1945 — the Official Gazette has announced patent grants without interruption on its same Tuesday schedule ever since. 4 Its paging begins afresh with the first issue of each month. The largest part of each issue is given over to the sketch (generally a single drawing) and the ab- stract of each patent issued on the particular Tuesday involved. These patents— since July 1, 1952 — have been classified under three major group headings: General and Mechanical, Chem- ical, and Electrical. '• No patent is valid unless it is signed by the U. S. Commissioner of Patents. During these two weeks in July 1945 there was no commissioner in office, and it became necessary for Congress to enact a special law to arrange for proper validation of patents "issued" on the two dates. Such a situation had never occurred before nor has it occurred since. The 1952 Act provided for just such contingencies. Let's select at random a copy of the Official Gazette. Here's one for July 1, 1969 — and under the first section: General and Mechanical, let's take note of some of the items patented on that particular day. Here we go: backrest, tooth cleaning device, mop holder, shoe retainer, woven stretch fabrics, dental restorative material, gyrocompasses, merid- ian detector, shoe fastener, impeller for rotary snow removal apparatus, telephone index devices, constant temperature bait bucket, yo-yo, swing-in window sash, school building with exchangeable annex unit, vacuum filter cleaner bags, garage door locks, remote temperature measurement de- vice, steel guitar tuning mechanism, lighthouse collimator, amusement rider, puppy .feeders, bar- becue grills, dust protector for Venetian blinds, acoustical chair, tie rack, bathtub spray mop. And so it goes, page after page after page, illus- trating the inventive genius of man — and woman, for two of these patents were granted to women. And remember, this is the record of a single week! The Official Gazette — a copy of which, once picked up, is hard to lay aside — contains other matter besides the sketch and abstract of each patent issued. It has a section on legal matters and a numerical count of patents. Additionally, this official weekly records re- issues of patents, plant patents, design patents, and an alphabetical list of all patentees whose patents are listed in the particular issue. Finally, there is a section devoted to trademarks. This particular issue recorded 1378 patents granted on July 1, 1969. Anyone with a normal amount of curiosity should make it a point to see a copy of the Of- ficial Gazette at his public library — if it has a copy. 5 Chances are he will do more than just glance at it, for it is filled with items of interest. But let's return to Ernest Williams. Let's suppose that after his search in connection with John's invention is completed, he recommends to John that a patent application on the baby walker be submitted. He therefore prepares the application with great care, reserving duplicate copies for himself and for John. After making sure that every single detail of the application, including its sketch, is correct and after having John sign the document, he encloses a check 5 A list of Official Gazette libraries is listed on page 14 of Q and A About Patents. See bibliography. ®Hn for the filing fee of $65 (the charge is slightly more for certain types of claims), and then mails the application to the Commissioner of Patents, Washington, D. C. 20231. PATENT OFFICE DOCKETING OF PAPERS And then what happens? When a patent application arrives, it is date- stamped in the mail room of the Patent Office, its money is checked in the Finance Branch of the Patent Office, and then it is forwarded to the Application Branch for processing. Here it is carefully checked for mechanical details. Has each instruction been followed correctly? Is the petition correctly filled in? Is the oath signed? Is the signa- ture complete? And so on and so on. If errors are found, correction is later required. The appli- cation is assigned a number and is routed to the patent examining group having charge of the par- ticular class of inventions concerned. Currently there are some 18 examining groups. Each of these groups is headed by a group di- rector who has supervisory examiners and a staff of from 20 to 60 examiners to help him. All examiners must be college graduates in en- gineering or in science and, in addition, the su- pervisory examiner generally has a law degree. Many examiners — as soon as they are accepted for government service — devote their evenings to earning a law degree at one of the law schools in the vicinity. PATENT OFFICE SEARCH And so to one of these groups a patent ap- plication is assigned, and when its turn comes, the work begins. The assistant examiner who will be responsible for the initial work, after reading the case, will begin his own thorough search just as did Ernest Williams. Because the Patent Office must be satisfied with the validity of each patent it grants, this official search must leave no stone unturned in its thorough examina- tion of each separate claim set forth by the in- ventor. Chances are the assistant examiner to whom John's application is assigned will go over many of the patents which Ernest Williams ex- amined earlier. (Indeed, present practice is to encourage the applicant to list all the prior patents he believes are pertinent.) In addition, 20 because of his knowledge and experience in his particular segment of patent research, this ex- aminer may find additional material. Perhaps one of the prior patents examined includes sub- ject matter which rules out as patentable one of John's claims. If so, the examiner makes careful note of it. As in the case of the preliminary search, the amount of time required for this exhaustive Pa- tent Office search will be determined by the amount of material to be covered and by the complexity of the invention. When the search has been completed, with each of John's claims checked meticulously against all prior disclosures of similar nature, the Patent Office notifies Ernest Williams of its findings. As a result of these findings, John may have to withdraw or modify a certain claim or claims. Here is where the training of a patent attorney or agent becomes a vital factor in the prosecution process, for, from here on, the prose- cution of John's application becomes primarily a matter of technical communication between the Patent Office and Ernest Williams. One of the final jobs of the patent examiner is conducting what is known as an interference search. He searches pertinent pending patent applications and patents recently issued to deter- mine whether or not John's pending patent ap- plication is in conflict with any of them. If it is, this conflict of claims may bring about what is called "interference action". This action is carried out in order to try to determine who actually was the first inventor, regardless (within some limits) of who first sent in his application. Interference action is infrequent.'' 1 But let's suppose that all goes well and that no interference is declared involving John's baby walker. And then one happy day there will come a letter from Washington stating that the claims have been allowed and that upon a second pay- ment — this time of $100 and an added fee for the printing and issuance of the patent — the patent will be issued. Some six weeks after the payment is received,. John will receive his patent signed by the Commissioner and will see his patent announced in the Official Gazette. How long will all this procedure take? Cur- rently, because of the heavy backlog of applica- tions, the average time between the filing of a 6 In Booklet 3 of The Patent System All Around You titled Who Invented It First? are interesting accounts procedures, including the story of Alexander Graham Bell's invention of the telephone. See bibliography. patent application and the issuance of the patent is 2Vo years. 7 During this time no one except the persons directly involved, has access to any part of the application. Such prohibition on the part of the Patent Office has gained for it and its employees a reputation for integrity that would be difficult to achieve in any other way. So much then for the sheer mechanism of the preparation of the patent application, its legal prosecution, and the final granting (or denial) of the patent. But now for some figures. SOME FIGURES With all the searching and consequent corre- spondence concerning the granting of patents, it goes without saying that the Patent Office is a busy place. It receives over 2Vi million pieces of mail each year. Its current staff numbers about 2,700, about half of whom are technically and legally trained to make decisions regarding the patentability of an invention in conformity with patent law. How many patent applications are filed each year? Currently, over 100,000. And how many 7 Shortly after World War II a backlog of 200,000 applications accumulated in the Patent Office. Although various expedients of recent years have reduced the backlog to 185,000, it should be noted that this backlog is a continuing problem because of I) the continuing high filing rate of applications, 2) the increasing mass of technology to be searched, and 3) the loss to industry over the years of trained examiners as fast as eligible technical personnel could be recruited. Even with all these difficulties, however, it is encouraging to note that the present average pendency of patent applications — from filing date to issue date, approximately 2V2 years — marks the shortest pendency period in 20 years. It is hoped that through the continued utilization of various current modifications in procedure, this period can be further reduced. Applications Received and Patents Issued for Selected Years x Patents Granted 3 41 223 155 544 468 992 4,772 13,313 13,947 26,292 26,499 35,930 38,882 48,322 48,850 47,976 49,989 65,000 - 'Up through 1830, figures are for calendar years; from 1840 on, for fiscal years. 2 Estimated. Applications Year Received 1780 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 765 1850 2,193 1860 7,653 1870 19,171 1880 23,012 1890 41,048 1900 41,980 1910 64,629 vm 86,893 1930 94,203 1940 69,857 1950 74,295 1960 84,475 1969 102,000- patents are granted each year? Currently, about 65,000. However, as a result of continuing im- provements in procedure, the figure is expected to reach 70,000 during the present fiscal year. The preceding table shows the number of ap- plications received (from 1840 on) and the num- ber of patents granted for specified years. Two percentage figures will be of interest. About 60 percent of the patents applied for: 6 out of 10, are granted. And of all the patent applications filed, only 1 percent become involved in interference proceedings. SALES, ASSIGNMENTS, AND LICENSES Now that John has acquired a patent which will last 17 years from the day of its issuance, it is up to him to decide — if he has not done so before — whether he will seek to manufacture and market the walker by himself, whether he will sell his patent to someone else, whether he will assign part ownership to a second person or to a company, or whether he will grant a license to someone else or to a company to make, use, or sell the walker. If he wishes to sell or license his patent, there is a government publication which an inventor can use to announce this fact. For a fee of $3, the Official Gazette will publish for him the num- ber and title of his patent and the name and ad- dress of its owner. Such information is published under the heading "Patents Available for Licens- ing or Sale". Some inventors choose to run advertisements in trade magazines and business publications which circulate among potential purchasers and licensees of patents. And if the patent owner wishes to select his own "audience", he can turn to the pages of the various directories of manu- facturers, directories which he will find in his public library. To each potential customer he may choose to send a copy of his patent. This is available to him — and to the public — from the Patent Office for 50 cents. There are many details concerning assignments and licenses which enter into the patent proce- dure, but for brief illustrative purposes, let's suppose that after consultation with Ernest Wil- liams, John decides to grant a five-year license to the Roberts Manufacturing Company to manufacture and sell the baby walker. In return for this license, the Roberts Company will pay John royalty. And what is royalty? Simply de- fined, it is an agreed-upon payment to the owner of a patent, a payment arising from the use of the invention disclosed in his patent. In John's case, the exact terms of the royalty agreement will be set forth in the contract made between John as licensor and owner of the patent and the Roberts Manufacturing Company as licensee and "user" of the patent. The details of such a con- tract will be different for almost every product, but in any case, John should lean heavily on his attorney for sound advice. At the end of the five-year period, John may choose to extend the licensing agreement, but when the 17-year patent period is ended, anyone may make, use, or sell the baby walker without receiving legal permission from John. In the meanwhile, he can derive satisfaction from the fact that his inventive skill has provided a baby walker which, through its manufacture and sale, can help hundreds of crippled children. THE SINGLE INVENTOR So far we've used as our example a single inventor, and the history of U. S. patents is filled with names of these contributors to American progress. We've listed, on the next two pages, 23 of these single inventors and the invention or inventions with which their names are most fre- quently associated. The inventions — with the ex- ception of the second one listed for Henry Ford — are in chronological order. 8 It is obvious as we read down such a list of inventions — and there are thousands and thou- sands more — that each has contributed immeas- urably to the industrial development of our free enterprise system. Mechanization of growing, 24 8 Remember that the U . S. Patent Office can send you a copy of each of these patents for 50 cents each. Be sure to give the inventor's name, his patent and its number, and the date of its INVENTOR INVENTION (PATENT NUMBER) DATE 1. Eli Whitney Cotton Gin (Unnumbered) March 14, 1794 2. Cyrus Hall McCormick Reaper (Unnumbered) June 21, 1834 3. Samuel F. B. Morse Telegraph (No. 1647) June 20, 1840 4. Charles Goodyear Preparing Fabrics of India Rubber (Vulcanized rubber) (No. 3633) June 15, 1844 5. Elias Howe, Jr. Sewing Machines (No. 4750) September 10, 1846 6. Abraham Lincoln (whose patent was not put to use) "A Device [bellows] for Buoying Vessels over Shoals " (No. 6469) May 22, 1849 7. Samuel Colt Revolver (No. 20,144) May 4, 1858 8. Richard J. Gatling Revolving Battery Gun (No. 36,836) November 4, 1862 9. George Westinghouse, Jr. Steam-Power Brake Device (No. 88,929) April 13, 1869 10. Joseph F. Glidden Barbed Wire (No. 157,124) November 24, 1874 11. Alexander Graham Bell Telephone (No. 174,465) March 7, 1876 12. Thomas Alva Edison (who was granted 1,093 patents) Phonograph (No. 200,521) Incandescent Lamp (No. 223,898) February 19, 1878 January 27, 1880 INVENTOR INVENTION (PATENT NUMBER) DATE 13. Elihu Thomson Apparatus for Electrical Welding (No. 347,140) August 10, 1866 14. Nikola Tesla Electrical Transmission of Power (Electric Motor) (No. 382,280) May 1, 1888 15. Charles M. Hall Manufacture of Aluminum (No. 400,665) April 2, 1889 16. Ottmar Mergenthaler Linotype (No. 436,532) September 16, 1890 17. Guglielmo Marconi, Italian citizen Wireless Telegraphy (No. 586,193) July 13, 1897 18. Rudolph Diesel of Berlin, Germany Internal-Combustion Engine (No. 608,845) August 9, 1898 19. Henry Ford Carburetor (No. 610,040) Motor Carriage (No. 686,046) August 30, 1898 November 5, 1901 20. Ferdinand Zeppelin of Stuttgart, Germany Navigable Balloons (No.621,195) March 14, 1899 21. Michael J. Owens Glass Shaping Machine for bottles, jars, etc. (No. 766,768) August 2, 1904 22. Leo H. Baekeland "Condensation Products and Method of Making Same"; led to bakelite and plastics (No. 942,809) December 7, 1909 23. George Washington Carver Process of Producing Paints and Stains (No. 1,632,365) June 14, 1927 harvesting, and preserving food, of providing clothing and shelter, of furnishing speedy means of communication and transportation, of provid- ing light and power for our cities and towns and farms — this is but a small fraction of what Ameri- can genius and inventive skill have done for our country. TEAM WORK But it is not always a single inventor, work- ing alone, that brings about such invention. We can think at once of Orville and Wilbur Wright who, on May 22, 1906, received a patent for certain "New and Useful Improvements in Flying Machines." Not so well known, perhaps, is the patent granted on June 23, 1868 to Christopher L. Sholes, Carlos Glidden, and Samuel W. Soule for the invention of the typewriter or the patent granted on July 12, 1870 to John W. Hyatt, Jr. and Isaiah S. Hyatt for "Improvements in Treat- ing and Molding Pyroxyline" — an invention from which sprang the great celluloid industry, supply- ing toilet articles, camera film, and a thousand other articles. A team of three physicists — who were awarded the Nobel Prize for physics in 1956 — were re- sponsible for the transistor: John Bardeen and Walter H. Brattain were granted a patent in 1950 and William Shockley was granted a patent in 1951. A still later example is the patent granted on May 17, 1955 to Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard for their neutronic reactor, an important develop- ment in the field of atomic energy. Whether an inventor works alone or with someone else, there are certain requisites which are basic for putting his idea into practical use. He must have time to devote to the development of his idea. He must have equipment with which to work. He must have space in which to carry on his experiments. Time, equipment, and space — given these three requisites, he is able to work within an environment contributive to his very best efforts. But these requisites are not always easy to come by, for their acquisition takes capital. Addi- tionally, the cost of obtaining the patent may run into hundreds of dollars. And if the inventor wishes to retain ownership of his patent, raising the funds for the manufacture of the resulting product may run into thousands or even millions of dollars. Not that such obstacles have deterred courage- D ous inventors, for patent history relates the stories of those who persevered courageously and re- ceived an inventor's rewards of recognition. On the other hand, patent history also relates the unfortunate stories of those who persevered courageously and lost. Because modern industry is devoting more and more time to the research and development of new products and new processes, and because it recognizes that this research and development require not only ability to create new ideas but capital to prepare them for public use, it has become increasingly interested in providing an environment in which inventive-minded scientists and technologists can work singly or in teams to bring into existence these new and needed products and processes. Therefore, in order to hire competent scientists and engineers and to provide them with expen- sive equipment, thousands of American companies plow back some of their profits into their oper- ating funds, profits that otherwise would be paid out to the stockholders. But stockholders who have chosen to invest in the future of American business appreciate such policy and are willing to wait for later — and often — larger dividends as a result of this research and development. This R&D industrial work holds out the promise of an exciting career for a young inventor who recognizes at the outset that the development of an invention sometimes requires expensive equipment which he himself cannot supply. Further, he reasons that association with other inventive minds can stimulate his creative talents and that the whole team and eventually the public can benefit from his contribution as a team mem- ber working on a given project. There are those, however, who prefer to work as "lone wolves" in this inventive business, a pref- erence indicated by the fact that currently some 25 percent of all patents granted are being issued to individuals rather than to inventors employed by others. 9 These "others" include not only industry, but universities and research institutions, and Federal and State governments. In the research labora- u There is an interesting review of opinions on the role of the individual inventor in Chapter V of The Sources of Invention. This book also includes fascinating case histories of inventors and inventions with excellent source references. See bibliography. In the July 1965 issue of the Journal of the Patent Office Society are some fifteen down-to-earth articles centered around the independent inventor, the small business inventor, and the employee inventor. A wide range of views is presented. See bibliography. tories of American industry, American univer- sities and research institutions, and American government, some of the inventive wonders of science and technology are being readied this very day for public use in the tomorrows ahead. THE EMPLOYED INVENTOR And here let's note a question that is often asked in this connection. When an inventor work- ing for a company, a university, a research insti- tution, or the government has his invention patented, should he or his employer reap the rewards of such invention? With this question a second one is often linked: Would the invention have been patented without the employer's sup- plying necessary time, equipment, and space? It is evident that both points of view must be considered. On the one hand, a man whose inventive genius finds the key which unlocks the door to a patentable invention is entitled to the fruits of the discovery. On the other hand, a company which provides the necessary time, equipment, and space for an inventor or team of inventors has earned its reward-rights. For example, a company assumes heavy risks, for it has no assurance that a marketable invention will emerge from the laboratory work of the inventor (s). Furthermore, a company may spend thousands of dollars of its stockholders' money on wjiat appears to be a patentable invention only to discover that another company has ac- quired a patent for a similar invention, an in- vention which makes it imperative that its own inventor or team of inventors start the project all over again. How are these reward-rights situations resolved? Each company works out its own system, and the inventor decides for himself whether or not he wishes to work under this system. If he decides to become a "salaried inventor", he generally signs a contract which sets forth his "property rights" as an inventor. From then on, he generally re- ceives his monetary reward through one or more media: through a stipulated share in the com- pany's profits stemming from "his" particular invention, through promotion in rank and salary, and through special monetary rewards of recog- nition. In a very real sense, he "trades" owner- ship and control of his invention for greater security, better equipment, stimulating associa- tions, and improved environment, v. Inventors employed by universities and research ' | institutions are rewarded according to the policy established by the particular school or institution, a policy which differs considerably from school to school and from institution to institution. And how about "salaried inventors" employed by the government? At present, each govern- ment agency determines the invention rights of its own employees, in accordance with a direc- tive from the President. 10 Regulations imple- menting the directive are administered by the Secretary of Commerce who has assigned the responsibility to the Commissioner of Patents. Generally speaking, rights to the inventions of government employees will belong to the govern- ment unless it is clearly shown that the ideas have no connection at all with the employee's official duties. Of the almost 229,000 scientists, engineers, and technicians employed by the Federal government, over 95 percent work in 1 1 agencies. These include the Departments of Commerce; Agricul- ture; Air Force; Army; Health, Education, and Welfare; Interior; Navy; and Transportation; the Atomic Energy Commission; the National Aero- nautics and Space Administration; and the Vet- erans Administration. As in industry, so in Federal service, inven- tors are often monetarily rewarded. Under the Federal Employees Incentive Awards Program, virtually all of the highest cash awards — ranging from $5,000 to $25,000— have been given for scientific and technical achievements, and gov- ernment inventors have been high on the list. The first $25,000 award, for example, went to Dr. William B. McLean, Technical Director of the U. S. Naval Ordnance Test Station at China Lake, California for "conceiving and directing the development of the Sidewinder Guided Mis- sile Weapon System." Federal employee-inventors also rank high in the list of those who have received the Presi- dential Award for Distinguished Service, the high- est honor the government can confer on a civilian employee. Non-Federal awards and professional prestige gained through publication of their find- ings have also been earned by the government scientist and technician. "' Executive order 10096, January 23, 1950 as amended by Executive Order 10930, March 24, 1961. There are other rewards for the government in- ventor. He has an opportunity to work with recognized leaders in his particular field, and in world-renowned laboratories, unexcelled in their equipment. Additionally, scientists who are interested in fundamental research often find greater opportunity for such activity in govern- ment work than in most industrial employment. 11 The following figures demonstrate that govern- ment employment offers opportunities and at- tracts inventively minded men and women. While the entire Federal civilian work force makes up slightly more than 3 percent of America's labor force, the Federal government employs 1 3 percent of the natural scientists and 8 percent of the pro- fessional engineers in the Nation. Of the govern- ment's white-collar workers some 12 percent are engaged in scientific or engineering work, with some 82,000 engineers, 32,000 physical scientists, and 25,000 biological scientists forming the core of the scientific team in civil service. And just in case your daughter Joan may de- cide to try her hand as a research chemist in the Federal government instead of teaching chem- istry in high school, as she now plans to do, she. will be interested to know that she will not be a lone wolf in the field. At present there are some 1,295 women working for Uncle Sam as chem- ists, and by the time she is ready to take her Civil Service Examination, there will probably be many more. PATENTS AND THE PUBLIC Even though we have centered our attention on the inventor — as he works singly or as a mem- ber of an industry, university, research institu- tion, or government team — we must always remember that the successful operation of the patent system is dependent not alone on the skill and genius of the inventor but also on the capital — the money which makes possible the production and marketing of the patented product or process — and the management which has been supplied by the entrepreneurial interest which assumes the financial risks involved. The coalition of these three basic interests — skill, money, and management — works in our competitive free enterprise system for the benefit of the general public, and because this is true, "See bibliography for Scientific and Technical Manpower Resources. it is not by accident that the strongest patent system in the world is located in the strongest Nation in the world. And this has been true since the beginning of our country. Our country's economy has made tremendous strides during the years which have elapsed since 1790 when "An Act to Promote the Progress of Useful Arts" vested the power to grant patents in three distinguished "Commissioners for the Pro- motion of Useful Arts": Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of War Henry Knox, and Attorney General Edmond Randolph. As the population moved West, inventions and patents blazed the way for progress. John Deere's steel plow helped the pioneers to cultivate new fields, and Cyrus H. McCormick's reaper enabled them to harvest the grain and send some of it East to feed the growing population. Joseph F. Glidden's barbed wire invention made possible effective enclosure of large areas where cattle could graze and be herded for shipment to market. Transportation, aided by the Conestoga wagon and the stagecoach, was accelerated by John Ruggles' improved locomotive and by better road beds. There came a time when the trains became longer and faster, and a serious problem of stopping them arose. It was then that George Westinghouse's air brake and later Eli H. Jan- ney's automatic car coupler solved the problems by insuring safety. Came then the automobile, the bus, the truck, the airplane to open new eras of transportation. As with transportation, so with communication. Patents made possible swifter dominion over space and time. These included Samuel F. B. Morse's telegraph, Alexander Graham Bell's telephone, Guglielmo Marconi's wireless telegraphy, Lee de Forest's vacuum tube which made radio possible, and Vladimir K. Zworykin's cathode ray tubes which made television possible. Further to spur the economy there were patents in the mechanical industries, such as the sewing machine and the linotype; in the metallurgical field, such as aluminum and the Bessemer steel process; in the chemical field, such as plastics and synthetic fibers. In every field of endeavor patents came into being to widen industrial hori- zons and to benefit the public at large. Over the years, relatively few patent holders have misused their patent grants, but the general public has been protected against possible misuse — such as restraint of trade — by anti-trust and other laws. So successful had the U. S. patent system be- come before its first century had ended that it won the attention of other countries. In 1876, a Swiss shoe manufacturer visited the Philadel- phia Centennial Exhibition. Upon returning home, he had this to say: "I am satisfied that no people has made, in so short a time, so many useful inventions as the American, and if today ma- chinery apparently does all the work, it never- theless, by no means, reduces the workman to a machine. He uses it as a machine, it is true, but he is always thinking about some improvements to introduce into it, and often his thoughts lead to fine inventions or useful improvements." So convinced was he that American progress cen- tered about its patent system that he urged his countrymen to follow suit. Twelve years later, in 1888, Switzerland had adopted a patent system. PATENTS AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES It is interesting to note that the United States was the first country to write a patent law — as it 12 For an excellent resume on the historical development of common law monopolies and of patent grants for inventions, consult Chapter 1 of (Deller's) Walker on Patents. See bibliog- raphy. is understood today — into its Federal statutes. Other countries had granted monopoly rights, had issued patents, and had worked under varying patent procedures, but only the United States and France had incorporated patent laws into their Federal structure before the beginning of the 19th century. 12 The following table records chronologically the date of the first Federal patent law for each of 42 selected countries. Second, it records the number of years for which the country issues a patent grant. Third, it records the dates when each country — which is a member — joined the International Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. This convention, which came into being on July 7, 1884, as a multilateral treaty between 14 nations, is generally spoken of as the Paris Union or the Paris Convention. Of some 140 countries issuing patent grants, some 79 are presently members. To the above three recordings, we have added — for those countries for which data are available — the number of U. S. patent applica- tions filed in foreign countries in 1967 and the number of foreign patent applications filed in the United States in 1967. TERM OF DATE OF FIRST PATENT PATENT LAW i GRANT i 1790 17 1791 20 1809 18 1810 18 1812 3 15 1819 17 1826 20 1830 15 1832 15 1840 5, 10, 15 1852 16 1852 15 1854 20 1859 16 1859 15 1864 5, 10, 15 1865 16 1869 17 1877' 18 1880 20 1880 15 1885 15 1885 18 COUNTRY United States France Netherlands Austria U.S.S.R. Sweden Spain Brazil Mexico Chile United Kingdom Portugal Belgium India Italy Argentina New Zealand Canada Federal Republic of Germany Luxembourg Turkey Japan Norway 1 For these first 3 columns we are indebted to HISTORICAL PATENT STATISTICS by P. JOURNAL OF THE PATENT OFFICE SOCIETY. NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS NUMBER OF FILED IN U.S. BY U.S.— ORIGIN RESIDENTS OF DATE OF ENTRY APPLICATIONS FOREIGN INTO PARIS FILED ABROAD COUNTRIES CONVENTION ' IN 1967 2 IN 1967 2 1887 1884 10,630 2,385 1884 5,131 711 1909 1,134 273 1965 347 427 1885 4,166 825 1884 2,531 106 1884 2,466 30 1903 3,700 * 78 Not a member 532 7 1884 13,740 4,597 1884 287 12 1884 4,693 319 Not a member 691 32 1884 7,450 866 Not a member 1,100* 35 1891 814 22 1923 19,138 1,456 1903 11,884 5,734 1922 396 1925 214 3 1899 11,460 3,354 1885 1,093 90 Federico and others in the February 1964 issue of the COUNTRY DATE OF FIRST PATENT LAW > TERM OF PATENT GRANT DATE OF ENTRY INTO PARIS CONVENTION ' NUMBER OF U.S. ORIGIN APPLICATIONS FILED ABROAD IN 1967' NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS FILED IN U.S. BY RESIDENTS OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN 1967 s Switzerland 1888 18 1884 3,058 1,513 Tunisia 1888 20 1884 66 Denmark 1894 17 1894 1,372 168 Hungary 1894 20 1909 97 66 Finland 1898 17 1921 527 73 Australia 1903 16 1907 5,734 263 Roumania 1906 15 1920 77 45 South Africa 1910 16 1947 1,900' 101 Morocco 1916 20 1917 94 1 Czechoslovakia 1919 15 1919 222 160 Poland 1919 15 1919 138 48 Greece 1920 15 1924 312 9 Bulgaria 1921 15 1921 40 11 Yugoslavia 1921 15 1884 159 17 Israel 1924 16 1933 711 64 Lebanon 1924 15 1924 68 3 Syrian Arab Republic 1924" 15 1924 65 Ireland 1927 16 1925 410 27 United Arab Republic 1949 < 15 1951 190 Others 116 Total 24,047 Percent of total U.S. filings 27.3 - Figures for these last 2 co umns have been furnished by the Office of International Patent and Trademark Affairs of the Patent Office. At that time, Russia Estimate ' At that time German) "At that time, Syria At that time, Egypt. DIFFERENCES IN PATENT PROCEDURES Obviously each country has its own procedures for the granting of patents, and it is this variance which complicates matters for an inventor who aDnlies for a patent in a foreign country. 13 For example, as the above table shows, the term of a patent grant varies, and in some coun- tries, an annual fee must be paid to keep the patent rights in good standing. But from the standpoint of a U. S. inventor, there are more serious variances. Whereas the United States stipulates that a patent must be granted to the first inventor, foreign patent laws (except for those of Canada and the Philippines) stipulate that a patent shall be granted to the inventor who first files his patent application. A third difference is that in the United States (except in very special situations) only the in- ventor or inventors may apply for a patent. In most foreign countries, an inventor's company may file the patent application. A fourth difference — and a most important one for a U. S. inventor to remember — is that patents in most countries can be invalidated by publica- tion or public use of the invention before the effective foreign filing date. John's oath in his application declared that he did not know or believe that his invention was described in any printed publication in any country before he invented it or that it Was in public use or sale in the United States more than one year before the date on which he invented it. Since there is no such time period permitted in most foreign countries, had John wished to ob- tain a foreign patent for his baby walker, Ernest Williams would have seen to it that the foreign patent or patents were applied for as soon as possible, even though the Paris Convention — and we mention this agreement below — gives him cer- tain leeway. A fifth difference concerns the "working" of a patent. In the United States if the holder of a patent chooses not to manufacture his patented product or to use his patented process, he is not forced to do so, unless it can be proved that there has been abuse of his patent right — as for example in an anti-trust case. On the other haDd, in most foreign countries the inventor must put his invention to work within a stated period or 13 An excellent discussion on "Foreign Patents" by S. Del- valle Goldsmith appears in The Encyclopedia of Patent Prac- tice and Invention Management, pages 314-328. See bibliog- raphy. See also "Patent Laws Worldwide" by Joseph M. Lightman and Robert Y . Lee in the February 22, 1965 issue of Inter- national Commerce. face the possibility of (a) compulsory licensing of the patent to someone else, or (b) in some few cases, patent revocation. A sixth difference deals with a specific and im- portant field of patents. It concerns the treatment accorded patent applications for chemical prod- ucts, especially pharmaceutical products. In many countries, and for a variety of reasons, such products can be patented only as to the processes of manufacture, not as products. On the other hand, under the United States patent law, there is no such restriction. This particular difference between our country's procedures and those of foreign countries has brought about difficult situations which have been widely publicized. 14 Such differences between countries require in- ventors and agents to follow different procedures. An inventor must file a separate application in each country in which he seeks a patent, for each country's patent is good only within its own national borders. It is true that the Paris Convention says to the inventors of its member countries: "By virtue of your country's membership in the Convention, you are accorded the same fundamental property rights and legal remedies in any member country that are accorded the nationals of that country. Second, if you have filed your application in any member country on — let's say — October 15, 1969, that date will allow you until October 15, 1970, to file in any other member country." These aids are certainly of great value, but much, much more remains to be done. In a world of constantly expanding trade — where a total of more than 735,000 patent applications are filed annually in all countries and where roughly half of these are duplicates — it is not surprising to learn that some of the world's ex- amining patent offices are faced, as is the United States, with large backlogs of applications await- ing examinations. In some of these countries it requires 5 years or more to obtain a patent. Simplifying international patent procedures could lead to less duplication of effort, reduce bar- riers to the exchange of goods and services of high technical content, and improve the economy of all countries. To effect such simplification, an International Patent Cooperation Treaty has been drafted by BIRPI, 15 and this draft is currently being considered by the 79 signatory nations to the Paris Convention. 14 There is a seventh difference which deals primarily with the Soviet Union. Most European Soviet bloc countries, in addition to granting patents, issue an inventor's certificate. Under the certificate system, the State assumes ownership and exclusive use of an invention and gives a monetary reward to the inventor based upon its reckoned value to the State. Obviously, such inventor's rights concern only the Soviet nationals. Foreigners generally seek patents. for the Protection of Intellectual Property. United International Bui THE REASON FOR FOREIGN PATENTS Since so much expense and delay are involved, why should an American inventor be concerned about obtaining a foreign patent? The answer is a simple one. Without such a patent there would be little incentive for the inventor through his own efforts or those of his licensees to expand the sale of his product or process outside the United States. Equipped with such patent, however, he is protected under the patent laws of the particular foreign country or countries concerned. Under such protection it becomes commercially feasible to expand the sale of his product or process. Such investment often brings monetary reward. In 1968, total receipts from U.S. patent and license fees from Western Europe alone totaled over $700 million. The Office of Business Economics, a part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, reckons that in 1968 American com- panies received payment from aboard for the use of "intangible" properties — such as patents, trade- marks, copyrights, and know-how — from both affiliated and non-affiliated firms of about $1.7 billion. And this is a lot of money. We translate $1 billion as one thousand million dollars and we write it with nine ciphers: $1,000,000,000, but do we really sense its enormity? If a man were to spend one dollar a minute from the mo- ment he was born — and this would mean $60 an hour, $1,440 every 24 hours, and $525,600 a year — he would have to live some 1,902 years to spend one billion dollars. Yet in one year, the United States receives from abroad from its "property rights" — most of which are for patents and trademarks — the huge sum of $1.7 billion. This annual income plays a very important role in our U. S. balance-of-payments account, for it helps to offset the annual outflow of Ameri- can dollars to foreign countries, a drain occa- sioned by various items, including expenditures by American travelers abroad (and these are mounting), expenditures by American businessmen and bankers who have foreign business interests, and expenditures by the Federal government for its military programs and for its economic assist- ance to developing countries. The securing of foreign patents is often a good financial investment for the American inventor who exerts the same promotional effort abroad as he does at home. That he is seeking such 38 investment is evident from the fact that in 1968, U. S. interests filed over 120,000 patent applica- tions in foreign countries. This represents a 46 percent increase over some 82,000 U. S. patent applications filed abroad just five years earlier, in 1963. PATENTS AND INDUSTRY GROWTH But there are added benefits accruing from foreign patents and one of them is the creation of new U. S. markets abroad. Just as a U. S. patented product or process primarily designed for use in Industry A in the United States may suggest a corollary or even different use in In- dustry B, just so a U. S. patent taken abroad may similarly open up the development of a kindred or wholly different industrial area. And this extension of use often opens markets for other U. S. products and processes and with them may come the need for further U. S. research and development in the country or countries concerned. This expansion not only creates new markets but often — and this is equally important — it ac- celerates the economies of the countries in which such patents are used and by doing so, creates new jobs and helps to promote a higher per capita income. In turn, such acceleration pro- motes international trade. This industry growth finds expression in another benefit for all countries concerned — the benefit stemming from competition. If a patent has opened new horizons at home or abroad, it has generated new ideas. As a result, the inven- tive skill which knows no geographical or political border, picks up the challenge of making a better mousetrap. For that reason no company dare rest on its oars. If a patented product or process is excellent today and bringing in merited earn- ings, it must be kept in the vanguard of progress, for only in this way can the inventor continue to profit by the head start which has been made possible by our country's patent system. The necessity for such continued competition explains why the library of the U. S. Patent Of- fice houses not only 3V£ million and more domes- tic patents, of which we spoke earlier, but more than 9 million foreign patents. As international trading in products, processes, and ideas expands, both of these collections will continue to grow. So much then for our patent relations with other nations. We welcome their inventions; they welcome ours. A healthy interplay of ideas is beneficial for all of us. THE REWARDS OF PERFORMANCE As we've reviewed the operation of the U. S. patent system, it becomes apparent that it has brought — and continues to bring — rewards both to the inventor and to the public. In return for the 17-year protection period which his country affords him, the inventor — or his company — can afford to invest time, labor, equipment, and money in his project because he knows that during this period, no one else, without incurring a liability for infringement of the patent, is free to copy his brainchild. True, the patent system cannot guarantee profits for it cannot guarantee the commercial success of a patented product or process, but it does foster a fair-play environment in which to pro- mote the use and sale of the patented idea. In return for this protection, the inventor dis- closes his patent so that anyone else may study it, gain ideas of his own for improving it or for improving a kindred — or even a wholly dif- ferent — project of his own. As to the reward for the public at large, we need only follow the typical American housewife through the opening hours of a single day. As Elizabeth Smith, wife and mother, you are awak- ened by a patented alarm clock. You don a dressing gown, the patented fabric of which was unknown five years ago. With a patented electric switch you turn on the bathroom light. Your electric toothbrush is the result of a string of patents. The material in your brush and comb has come about through research and develop- ment and patents. Every item of your kitchen, where you prepare breakfast for your family, sings out for our patent system. There's the electrical or gas equipment: refrigerator, range, freezer, toaster, broiler, each with its component parts representing ideas — ideas — ideas put to use! The packages you take down from the shelves enclose food items which you have purchased under registered trademarks. Such trademarks are recognized throughout the country, and serve to guarantee the quality of these products. The food contents of these packages have been pre- pared by patented processes which have made possible the high productivity necessary to feed hungry and thirsty Americans. But you're interrupted by the children and by John who demand all your attention for the moment. So let's wait till they leave. And even as they do so, the bicycles of the children as they take off for school and the automobile which John drives off and the jet plane high above the house are reminders of the hundreds of patents which have underwritten the transportation sys- tem of the United States. As you turn back to your round of duties, the telephone rings. Here is an invention that has created an industry whose investment in plants and equipment in 1968 was $59 billion, and whose telephones then in use in the United States numbered 109 million. Patents and inventions thus play a vital role in our daily life. They provide products and processes which we take for granted. Perhaps we ought to make ourselves more aware of what we owe to the inventive skill and genius of persons throughout the world who have contributed to the growth and prosperity of our nation. Certain- ly we can be grateful to the Founding Fathers who underwrote our patent system. No wise American will boast that our patent system operates perfectly, but it has achieved much over the past 179 years. Among its many contributions, it has operated to protect the in- dividual and small business concerns during the formative period of a new enterprise. With its encouragement of and reward to American in- ventiveness, it has produced new products and processes which have placed the United States in the forefront in scientific and technological prog- ress. It has aided our national defense, trans- portation, and communications, and is now en- couraging science to solve new problems such as water desalinization. It has contributed to the improvement of health and the public safety. Finally, the patent system has helped to bring about the highest standard of living the world has ever known. We can be proud of such a record! SLIDES The American Patent Law Association has made some 143 2 X 2 slides of interesting patents and trademarks which can be purchased for 50 cents each or rented for 10 cents each. Additionally, it has some case history fact sheets of some 26 patents for which there are slides. Address inquiries to Miss Charlotte E. Gauer, American Patent Law Association, 2001 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202. BIBLIOGRAPHY Here are suggestions for further reading on patents. Your public library can supply much of the listed material. For addresses of publishers and other pertinent information, consult the footnotes at the end of this listing. Free publications are available as long as the current supply lasts. 1. (An) Analytical History of the Patent Pol- icy of the Department of Health, Educa- cation, and Welfare, Gladys Harrison. 1961. 93 pages. 30 cents. (Study No. 27).i 2. Annual Index of Patents Issued from the Patent Office (a part of the Official Gazette which may be purchased separately). Part I includes alphabetical listing of patentees. 1968. 1401 pages. $11.50. Part II includes numerical listing of patent numbers, giving class and subclass. 1968 issue in press.^ 3. Annual Index of Trademarks Issued from the Patent Office (a part of the Official Guide which may be purchased separately). Includes trademark registrations by class, by registration number, and by name. 1968 issue. 321 pages. $4.25.= 4. Coats of Arms of the Business World. 12 pages. Single copy 15 cents; for 11 or more copies, 12 cents. 4 5. Compulsory Licensing of Patents — A Leg- islative History. Includes bibliography. Catherine S. Corry. 1958. 70 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. 12). 1 6. Compulsory Licensing of Patents Under Some Non-American Systems. Fredrik Neumeyer. 1959. 51 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 19). J 7. Court Decisions as Guides to Patent Of- fice. George C. Roeming. 1960. 18 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 25). 1 8. Decision Leaflets (a part of the Official Ga- zette which may be purchased separately). Includes decisions of the Commissioner of Patents and U.S. Courts; register of patents available for license or sale; tabulation of condition of work in each examining opera- tion. Annual subscription; domestic $10.00; foreign $12.50; Single weekly copy, 20 9. Digest: Presents non-technical summaries of the research and news of educational activities of the Patents, Trademark, and Copyright Research Institute. Single copy free. 5 10. Directory of Registered Patent Attorneys and Agents — Arranged by States and Coun- tries. 1968. In press. 2 11. Distribution of Patents Issued to Corpora- tions (1939-55). Lists companies holding over 100 patents. P. J. Federico. 1957. 34 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 3). 1 12. Economic Aspects of Patents and the American Patent System: A BIBLIOG- RAPHY. Julius W. Allen. 1958. 54 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 14). 1 13. (An) Economic Review of the Patent Sys- tem. Includes bibliography. Fritz Machlup. 1958. 98 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. 15). 1 14. Efforts to Establish a Statutory Standard of Invention. Includes bibliography. Victor L. Edwards. 1958. 29 pages. 15 cents (Study No. 7). 1 15. (The) Encyclopedia of Patent Practice and Invention Management. Edited by Robert Calvert. 1964. 860 pages. $30.» 16. Eureka! Hugh A. Mulligan. Petroleum To- day, Summer 1965 issue, pages 15-17.' 17. (The) Examination System in the U.S. Patent Office. Eugene W. Geniesse. 1961. 181 pages. 50 cents. (Study No. 29 J. 1 18. Exchange of Patent Rights and Technical Information Under Mutual Aid Programs. Michael H. Cardozo. 1958. 51 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 10). * In connection with this study, see its follow-up: Patents and Technical Information Agreements (Study No. 24)} 19. Expediting Patent Office Procedure: A Legislative History. Includes bibliography. Margaret M. Conway. 1960. 105 pages. 30 cents. (Study No. 23). 1 20. Exporters Have Important Stake in Pro- tecting Their Industrial Property Rights Outside the United States. Vincent Trava- glini, International Commerce (See Item 32.) November 2, 1964, pages 4-8.' 21. General Information Concerning Patents. 1967. 40 pages. 20 cents. 2 22. General Information Concerning Trade- marks. 1968. 28 pages. 15 cents. 2 23. Government Assistance to Invention and Research — A Legislative History. Barbara H. Jibrin and Catherine S. Corry. 1960. 199 pages. 55 cents. (Study No. 22). 1 24. Guidelines for the Preparation of Patent Abstracts. Single copy free. 3 25. How Inventions Are Put to Work. 12 pages. Single copy 15 cents; for 11 or more copies, 12 cents. 8 26. How to Make Your Ideas Pay Off. Dena Reed. 1965. 15 pages. 15 cents. Lower price for quantity orders. 9 27. How You Get a Patent Today. 12 pages. 15 cents. 8 28. How You Get a Trademark. 16 pages. 15 cents. 4 29. IDEA: Journal of research and education. Issued five times a year. Single number $3.50. Annual subscription $15. 10 30. (The) Impact of the Patent System on Re- search. Seymour Melman. 1958. 62 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. II). 1 31. Independent Inventors and the Patent Sys- tem. (Cites 82 case histories). C. D. Tuska. 1961. 40 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 28).' 32. International Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce Weekly. Annual subscription: domestic $20; foreign $26.25. Single copy 40 cents. 2 33. (The) International Patent System and For- eign Policy. Raymond Vernon. 1957. 52 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 5). 1 34. Invention and the Patent System. Joint Eco- nomic Committee, U.S. Congress. S. Colum Gilfillan. 1964. 247 pages. 60 cents. 2 35. Inventors and Inventions. Clarence D. Tuska. 1957. 174 pages. Contains interest- ing case histories and excellent reference material. 1 36. Journal of the Patent Office Society. Excel- lent articles relating to inventors, patents, and trademarks. Legislative reports. Various viewpoints. Annual subscription $6.00. Single copy $1." 37. (The) Law of Employed Inventors in Eu- rope. Fredrik Neumeyer. 1963. 156 pages. 40 cents. (Study No. 30). 1 38. Looking Into the Fascinating World of In- ventions. 13 pages. 15 cents. 8 39. Manual of Classification. Looseleaf. $11 domestic; $14 foreign. 2 40. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. Looseleaf. $8.50 domestic; $11 foreign. 2 41. Obtaining Information from Patents. 1968. 4 pages. Single copy free. 3 42. Official Gazette. Annual subscription: $78 domestic; $96 foreign. Single weekly copy $1.50. 2 43. Opposition and Revocation Proceedings in Patent Cases. P. J. Federico. 1957. 19 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 4). 1 44. Patent and Technical Information Agree- ments. Elias C. Rodriguez, George F. Wes- terman, Michael H. Cardozo. 1960. 79 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. 24). 1 Follow up of Exchange of Patent Rights and Tech- nical Information Under Mutual Aid Pro- grams (Study No. 10). 1 45. Patent Laws. 1965. 102 pages. 35 cents. 2 46. Patent Laws Worldwide. Joseph M. Light- man and Robert Y. Lee. International Commerce (See Item 32) February 22, 1965, pages 4-9.' 47. Patent Office Fees — A Legislative History. Victor L. Edwards, 1958. 16 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 13). 1 48. Patent Practices of the: Department of Agriculture. 1961. 161 pages. 45 cents; De- partment of Commerce. 1961. 28 pages. Illustrations. 15 cents; Department of De- fense. 1961. 129 pages. 35 cents; Depart- ment of the Interior. 1962. 55 pages. 20 cents; Department of the Treasury. 1960. 93 pages. 30 cents; Federal Aviation Agency. 1961. 70 pages. 25 cents; Federal Communi- cations Commission. 1962. 16 pages. 15 cents; General Services Administration, 1959. 14 pages. 10 cents; Government Printing Office. 1960. 10 pages. 10 cents; National Science Foundation. 1959. 4 pages. 10 cents; Post Office Department. 1959. 6 pages. 10 cents; Tennessee Valley Author- ity. 1959. 23 pages. 15 cents; Veterans Ad- ministration. 1959. 16 pages. 15 cents. 2 49. Patent Rights Under Government Contract (NAM Current Issues Series No. 8). 11 pages. Single copy free." 50. Patents and Inventions: An Information Aid for Inventors. 1968. 22 pages. 15 cents. 2 51. Patents and Nonprofit Research. Archie M. Palmer. 1957. 66 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. 6). 1 52. Patents and Your Tomorrow. Excellent for children and grown-ups. 1961. 23 pages. Single copy free. 12 53. Patents, Progress, and Prosperity. William R. Bullard. (NAM Economic Series No. 62). 1953. 20 pages. Single copy free." 54. (The) Patent System All Around You. 12 pages. 15 cents. 8 55. (The) Patent System and the Modern Econ- omy. George E. Frost. 195.7. 77 pages. 25 cents. (Study No. 2). 1 56. (The) Patent System: Its Economic and Social Basis. Victor Abramson. 1960. 25 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 26). i 57. Proposals for Improving the Patent System. Vannevar Bush. 1956. 30 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. I). 1 58. Q and A About Patents. Single copy free. 3 59. Q and A About Plant Patents. Single copy free. 3 60. Q and A About Trademarks. Single copy free. 3 61. Recordation of Patent Agreements — A Legislative History. Includes bibliography. Michael Daniels, Victor L. Edwards, and Julius W. Allen. 1958. 27 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 9). 1 62. Renewal Fees and Other Patent Fees in Foreign Countries. P. J. Federico. 1958. 40 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 17). 1 63. (The) Research and Development Factor in Mergers and Acquisitions. Murray N. Friedman. 1958. 35 pages. 15 cents. (Study No. 16). 1 64. (The) Role of the Court Expert in Patent Litigation. Leo H. Whinery. 1958. 96 pages. 30 cents. (Study No. 8). 1 65. Rules of Practice of the United States Pat- ent Office in Patent Cases. Includes an ap- pendix of forms. 1968. 168 pages. 55 cents. 2 66. Scientific and Technical Manpower Re- sources. Summary information on employ- ment characteristics, supply, and training. Excellent bibliography and appendices. 1964. National Science Foundation. 184 pages. $1.25. 2 67. Single Court of Patent Appeals — A Legisla- tive History. Includes bibliography. Mar- garet M. Conway. 1959. 55 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 20 )/> 68. (The) Sources of Invention. John Jewkes, David Sowers, Richard Stillerman. 1958. 428 pages. $6.75. Paper $4.25. 13 69. (The) Story of Patents and Progress. Illus- trated. 1962. 32 pages. Single copy free." 70. (The) Story of the United States Patent Office. Fourth edition. Cites important events in the development of the United States patent system and lists chronologi- cally inventions having important effect on the economy. Lists by years the numbers of patent applications filed, of patents granted, and of trademarks registered. Also lists publications obtainable from the U.S. Patent Office. 1965. 40 pages. 20 cents.2 71. Suggestions for a Basic Economics Library. A Guide to the Building of an Economics Library for School, Classroom, or Individ- ual. Lawrence E. Learner and Percy L. Guyton. 1965. 58 pages. Single copy 75 cents." We include this item since it applies to our entire series: Do You Know Your Eco- nomic ABC's? 72. Synthetic Rubber: A Case Study in Techno- logical Development Under Government Direction. Robert A. Solo. 1959. 130 pages. 35 cents. (Study No. 18). ' 73. Technical Research Activities of Coopera- tive Associations. Includes bibliography. Of- fice of Technical Service, U.S. Department of Commerce. 1959. 59 pages. 20 cents. (Study No. 21 L 1 74. "To Promote the Progress of... Useful Arts" in an Age of Exploding Technology. Report of the President's Commission on the U.S. Patent System. 1966. 64 pages. 65 cents. 2 (This is Senate Document No. 5, 90-1, February 2, 1967). 75. Trademark Rules of Practice of the Patent Office, with Forms and Statutes. Revised. 1966. 124 pages. 45 cents. 2 76. Trademark Supplement (a part of the Offi- cial Gazette which may be purchased sep- arately). Includes: trademark notices, trademark applications published for opposition, list of trademark applicants, classified list of registered trademarks. Annual subscription: domestic, $20.50; foreign, $26.25. Single weekly copy 40 cents. 2 77. (The) Treasure Trove Open to All: The Patent Office, Isaac Fleischmann. Printer's Ink, May 29, 1964.' 78. United States Patents 1790 to 1870: New ' Uses for Old Ideas. Peter C. Welsh. Smith- sonian Institution. 1965. 152 pages. 57 Illus- trations. 70 cents. 2 79. (Delia's) Walker on Patents. An excellent second edition, by Anthony William Deller of a valuable compendium of patent infor- mation. 1964. Presently, 4 volumes are available at $25 apiece. Volumes I, II, and IV have 1968 supplements. 10 80. Who Invented It First? 13 pages. 15 cents." 1 This is one of 30 studies printed for the use of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Commit- tee on the Judiciary, as a part of the study of the United States patent system made during the 84th, 85th, 86th, and 87th Con- gresses. The studies were prepared under the supervision of John C. Stedman, Asso- ciate Counsel of the subcommittee. These studies — several of which include valuable references and bibliog- raphies — may be available in your public library. If not, order from the Superintend- ent of Documents, U.S. Government Print- ing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402. If its supply of any of the docu- ments is exhausted, write to the Committee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights, Room 349A, Senate Office Building, Wash- ington, D.C. 20510. 2 Order from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. 45 3 Write to Office of Information, Patent Office, U.S. Department of Com- merce, Washington, D.C. 20231. 4 This is one of two booklets on trademarks, in a continuing series: The Trademark: The Maker's Monogram, "is- sued for young people" by the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Research Insti- tute, The George Washington University, 708 22nd Street, N. W., Washington, D.C. 20006. 5 Available through the courtesy of the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Re- search Institute. See address in footnote 4 above. ''' Consult at your public library or order from the Reinhold Publishing Corpo- ration, 430 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10022. 7 Consult at your public library. 8 This is one of five booklets on patents "issued for young people" by the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Research Institute. See address in footnote 4 above. "Order from Good Reading Rack Service, Koster Dana Corporation, 505 Eighth Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10018. 10 Order from the Patent Trademark, and Copyright Research Institute. See ad- dress in footnote 4 above. 11 Consult at your public library or order from the Patent Office Society, 104 Academy Avenue, Federalsburg, Maryland. 12 Available through the courtesy of the National Association of Manufacturers, 277 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10017. 13 Consult at your public library or order from St. Martin's Press, Inc., 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. 20010. 14 Available through the courtesy of the Public Relations Department, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Wilming- ton, Delaware 19898. 15 Order from the Joint Council on Economic Education, 1212 Avenue of the Americas, New York, N.Y. 10036. 16 Consult at your public library or order from Baker, Voorhies & Company, Inc., 30 Smith Avenue, Mount Kisco, New York. QUESTIONS The answers to some of the following questions are indicated in this booklet. The answers to others will take a little pondering. One question may send you to your dictionary. 1. From what legislative beginnings did the patent rights of an inventor evolve in the United States? 2. What incentive does our patent system offer an inventor? What prevents a patent right from being an actual monopoly? 3. What evidence can we offer that our patent system spurs our economy? What President said: "The patent system added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius."? 4. Name five articles which patents have made possible in the last decade. Name five more articles unknown to your grandparents which patents have made possible. 5. Look for patent numbers on articles which you use daily. What does "patent pending" mean? 6. Give an example of a patented process, ma- chine, manufacture, composition of matter. 7. In terms of granting a patent, what does the term new prohibit? The term useful? 8. On what other things can patents not be granted? Why? 9. What does the term serendipity mean? How might it relate to an invention? 10. How would you define a patent? In the United States, for how long is a patent granted? Can this time be extended? 11. Why is it generally wise for an inventor, who wishes to obtain a patent, to engage the serv- ices of a patent attorney or agent? 12. What is a preliminary search? Who makes it? Why does he make it? 13. What is the Index to Classification? The Manual of Classification? In terms of patent searching, interpret 297-5 + . What is a cross reference? 14. What is the importance of the Official Gazette? 15. Trace what happens to a patent application from its mailing to its approval or denial. 16. What are the advantages of being a "lone wolf" inventor? Of being a member of an inventors' team in industry? In government? 17. What is the Paris Convention? What advantages does it offer to the inventors of a member country? 18. What countries have the same length of patent rights that we have? Which countries grant the longest term for patent rights? 19. What are some of the difficulties in securing a patent abroad? Why should an inventor be interested in securing one? 20. What has the patent system done for the pub- lic in the United States? In other countries? ORDER FORM DO YOD KNOW YOOR ECONOMIC ABC'S? How Gross National Prod- uct Mirrors Our Economy 20 cents enclose $_ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR MANKIND'S PROGRESS How Science and Technol- ogy Are Applied to Further Economic Growth 25 cents ONCLE SAM COUNTS Census helps 35 cents I enclose for U.S. BALANCE OF PAYMENTS How Our International Ac- counts Affect Our Econ- omy 25 cents MEASUREMENT - PACEMAKER OF ECONOMIC GROWTH How Precision of Measure- ment Affects Our Total Economic Structure 25 cents PROFITS AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY How Profit Incentive Stimu- lates Economic Growth 25 cents I enclose for INTERNATIONAL TRADE: GATEWAY TO GROWTH How Imports and Exports Affect Our Economic Growth 25 cents PATENTS: SPUR TO AMERICAN PROGRESS How Our Patent System Sparks Our National Eco- nomic Development 35 cents TRAVEL/USA How Tourism in the United States Benefits Our Coun- try 25 cents I enclose for U.S. ECONOMIC GROWTH How Expansion of Natural Resources, Capital, and Manpower Has Accelerated the American Economy 25 cents I enclose for THE MARKETING STORY How Marketing Activates Our Economic Progress 30 cents I enclose for Send check, money order, or Supt. of Docs, coupons to: SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20402 or any Department of Commerce Field Office Please send booklets to: Name I — 363-723 by learning how its economy operates Product Technology Payments Measurement Profits International Trade Patents Tourism Growth Marketing Census These eleven factors are basic to economic progress. And each is explored in a continuing series of booklets that asks, "Do You Know Your Economic ABC's?" Written in everyday language and issued by the Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of Commerce, the booklets are designed to in- crease your understanding of what our economic system means to every American. Order form on opposite page. Discount of 25 percent for 100 or more of any one booklet. A00Q07[Hk43fi7 XrTc***"'