Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502 (1917), is United States Supreme Court decision that is notable as an early example of the patent misuse doctrine. It held that, because a patent grant is limited to the invention described in the claims of the patent, the patent law does not empower the patent owner, by notices attached to the patented article, to extend the scope of the patent monopoly by restricting the use of the patented article to materials necessary for their operation but forming no part of the patented invention, or to place downstream restrictions on the articles making them subject to conditions as to use. The decision overruled The Button-Fastener Case, and Henry v. A.B. Dick Co., which had held such restrictive notices effective and enforceabl
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co. (en)
|
rdfs:comment
| - Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502 (1917), is United States Supreme Court decision that is notable as an early example of the patent misuse doctrine. It held that, because a patent grant is limited to the invention described in the claims of the patent, the patent law does not empower the patent owner, by notices attached to the patented article, to extend the scope of the patent monopoly by restricting the use of the patented article to materials necessary for their operation but forming no part of the patented invention, or to place downstream restrictions on the articles making them subject to conditions as to use. The decision overruled The Button-Fastener Case, and Henry v. A.B. Dick Co., which had held such restrictive notices effective and enforceabl (en)
|
foaf:name
| - (en)
- Motion Picture Patents Company v. Universal Film Manufacturing Company, et al. (en)
|
foaf:depiction
| |
dcterms:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
thumbnail
| |
Dissent
| |
JoinDissent
| - McKenna, Van Devanter (en)
|
ParallelCitations
| |
USPage
| |
USVol
| |
ArgueDate
| |
ArgueYear
| |
case
| - Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., (en)
|
courtlistener
| |
DecideDate
| |
DecideYear
| |
fullname
| - Motion Picture Patents Company v. Universal Film Manufacturing Company, et al. (en)
|
justia
| |
Litigants
| - Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co. (en)
|
majority
| |
loc
| |
has abstract
| - Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502 (1917), is United States Supreme Court decision that is notable as an early example of the patent misuse doctrine. It held that, because a patent grant is limited to the invention described in the claims of the patent, the patent law does not empower the patent owner, by notices attached to the patented article, to extend the scope of the patent monopoly by restricting the use of the patented article to materials necessary for their operation but forming no part of the patented invention, or to place downstream restrictions on the articles making them subject to conditions as to use. The decision overruled The Button-Fastener Case, and Henry v. A.B. Dick Co., which had held such restrictive notices effective and enforceable. (en)
|
ArgueDateB
| |
Concurrence
| |
cornell
| |
googlescholar
| |
Overturned previous case
| - Henry v. A.B. Dick Co. (en)
|
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |
is Wikipage redirect
of | |