The Black Flag - 9

The Black Flag - 9

"The Goebel case emphasizes two defects in the court procedure in patent cases. One is

that they may be spun out almost interminably, even, possibly, to the end of the life of the

patent; the other is that the judge who decides the case does not see the witnesses. That

adverse decision at St. Louis would never have been made if the court could have seen

the men who swore for Goebel. When I met Mr. F. P. Fish on his return from St. Louis,

after he had argued the Edison side, he felt keenly that disadvantage, to say nothing of the

hopeless difficulty of educating the court."

In the earliest days of the art, when it was apparent that incandescent lighting had come

to stay, the Edison Company was a shining mark at which the shafts of the dishonest

were aimed. Many there were who stood ready to furnish affidavits that they or some one

else whom they controlled had really invented the lamp, but would obligingly withdraw

and leave Edison in possession of the field on payment of money. Investigation of these

cases, however, revealed invariably the purely fraudulent nature of all such offers, which

were uniformly declined.

As the incandescent light began to advance rapidly in public favor, the immense

proportions of the future market became sufficiently obvious to tempt unauthorized

persons to enter the field and become manufacturers. When the lamp became a

thoroughly established article it was not a difficult matter to copy it, especially when

there were employees to be hired away at increased pay, and their knowledge utilized by

the more unscrupulous of these new competitors. This is not conjecture but known to be a

fact, and the practice continued many years, during which new lamp companies sprang

up on every side. Hence, it is not surprising that, on the whole, the Edison lamp litigation

was not less remarkable for quantity than quality. Between eighty and ninety separate

suits upon Edison's fundamental lamp and detail patents were brought in the courts of the

United States and prosecuted to completion.

In passing it may be mentioned that in England France, and Germany also the Edison

fundamental lamp patent was stubbornly fought in the judicial arena, and his claim to be

the first inventor of practical incandescent lighting was uniformly sustained in all those

countries.

Infringement was not, however, confined to the lamp alone, but, in America, extended all

along the line of Edison's patents relating to the production and distribution of electric

light, including those on dynamos, motors, distributing systems, sockets, switches, and

other details which he had from time to time invented. Consequently, in order to protect

its interests at all points, the Edison Company had found it necessary to pursue a vigorous

policy of instituting legal proceedings against the infringers of these various patents, and,

in addition to the large number of suits on the lamp alone, not less than one hundred and

twenty-five other separate actions, involving some fifty or more of Edison's principal

electric-lighting patents, were brought against concerns which were wrongfully

appropriating his ideas and actively competing with his companies in the market.

The ramifications of this litigation became so extensive and complex as to render it

necessary to institute a special bureau, or department, through which the immense detail

could be systematically sifted, analyzed, and arranged in collaboration with the numerous

experts and counsel responsible for the conduct of the various cases. This department was

organized in 1889 by Major Eaton, who was at this time and for some years afterward its

general counsel.

In the selection of the head of this department a man of methodical and analytical habit of

mind was necessary, capable of clear reasoning, and at the same time one who had gained

a thoroughly practical experience in electric light and power fields, and the choice fell

upon Mr. W. J. Jenks, the manager of the Edison central station at Brockton,

Massachusetts. He had resigned that position in 1885, and had spent the intervening

period in exploiting the Edison municipal system of lighting, as well as taking an active

part in various other branches of the Edison enterprises.

Thus, throughout the life of Edison's patents on electric light, power, and distribution, the

interminable legal strife has continued from day to day, from year to year. Other

inventors, some of them great and notable, have been coming into the field since the

foundation of the art, patents have multiplied exceedingly, improvement has succeeded

improvement, great companies have grown greater, new concerns have come into

existence, coalitions and mergers have taken place, all tending to produce changes in

methods, but not much in diminution of patent litigation. While Edison has not for a long

time past interested himself particularly in electric light and power inventions, the bureau

which was initiated under the old regime in 1889 still continues, enlarged in scope,

directed by its original chief, but now conducted under the auspices of several allied

companies whose great volumes of combined patents (including those of Edison) cover a

very wide range of the electrical field.

As the general conception and theory of a lawsuit is the recovery of some material

benefit, the lay mind is apt to conceive of great sums of money being awarded to a

complainant by way of damages upon a favorable decision in an important patent case. It

might, therefore, be natural to ask how far Edison or his companies have benefited

pecuniarily by reason of the many belated victories they have scored in the courts. To this

question a strict regard for truth compels the answer that they have not been benefited at

all, not to the extent of a single dollar, so far as cash damages are concerned.