About: Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : umbel-rc:Event, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FBauer_%26_Cie._v._O%27Donnell&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell, 229 U.S. 1 (1913), was a 1913 United States Supreme Court decision involving whether a purchaser of a patented product bearing a price-fixing notice incurs guilt of patent infringement by reselling the product at a price lower than that which the notice commands. A divided Court (5–4) held that it was not. Notice to the Retailer. A purchase is an acceptance of this condition. All rights revert to the undersigned in the event of violation.

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:label
  • Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell (en)
rdfs:comment
  • Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell, 229 U.S. 1 (1913), was a 1913 United States Supreme Court decision involving whether a purchaser of a patented product bearing a price-fixing notice incurs guilt of patent infringement by reselling the product at a price lower than that which the notice commands. A divided Court (5–4) held that it was not. Notice to the Retailer. A purchase is an acceptance of this condition. All rights revert to the undersigned in the event of violation. (en)
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Bauer & Cie. and the Bauer Chemical Company v. James O'Donnell (en)
foaf:depiction
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/William_Rufus_Day_cph.3b31004.jpg
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/1911_adv't_for_Samtogen,_King_of_Tonics.jpg
dcterms:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
sameAs
Subsequent
  • Certificate from the Court of appeals of the District of Columbia. (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
thumbnail
Dissent
  • Holmes (en)
JoinDissent
  • McKenna, Lurton, Van Devanter (en)
JoinMajority
  • White, Hughes, Lamar, Pitney (en)
ParallelCitations
USPage
USVol
ArgueDate
ArgueYear
case
  • Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell, (en)
courtlistener
DecideDate
DecideYear
findlaw
fullname
  • Bauer & Cie. and the Bauer Chemical Company v. James O'Donnell (en)
justia
Litigants
  • Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell (en)
majority
  • Day (en)
loc
has abstract
  • Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell, 229 U.S. 1 (1913), was a 1913 United States Supreme Court decision involving whether a purchaser of a patented product bearing a price-fixing notice incurs guilt of patent infringement by reselling the product at a price lower than that which the notice commands. A divided Court (5–4) held that it was not. Bauer & Cie, a German company, was the assignee of U.S. Patent No. 601,995, covering Sanatogen, a water-soluble drug product (patent medicine), advertised as the "King of Tonics" and a strength-giving "concentrated scientific food." Bauer sold the patented product in the United States through its exclusive sales agent, Hehmeyer, under a license agreement. Sanatogen was sold with this notice on each bag: Notice to the Retailer. This size package of Sanatogen is licensed by us for sale and use at a price not less than one dollar ($1.00). Any sale in violation of this condition, or use when so sold, will constitute an infringement of our patent No. 601,995, under which Sanatogen is manufactured, and all persons so selling or using packages or contents will be liable to injunction and damages. A purchase is an acceptance of this condition. All rights revert to the undersigned in the event of violation. O'Donnell, a retail druggist in Washington, DC, purchased Sanatogen at wholesale and resold the Sanatogen for less than $1. He persisted in doing this and was cut off, but he managed to continue to purchase the product from jobbers in DC "and avers that he will continue such sales." This led to the present patent infringement suit. The Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia certified the case to the Supreme Court with this question: Did the Acts of the appellee [O'Donnell] in retailing at less than the price fixed in said notice on original packages of Sanatogen purchased of jobbers, as aforesaid, constitute infringement of appellants' patent? (en)
googlescholar
prov:wasDerivedFrom
page length (characters) of wiki page
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 56 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software