Important Patent Case

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

WHITE LEAD.—U. S. Circuit Court, Judge Nelson presiding.—The parties were George W. Campbell, complainant, against the Atlantic White Lead Co., N. Y. This trial lasted three days, viz., on the 11th, 12th, and 13th ult. The action was brought for the infringement of a patent granted to the plaintiff, November 20th, 1847, and re-issued August 2nd, 1852, tor a machine for casting bullets, and the buckles ot lead used in the manufacture of white lead. It appeared that the plaintiff's machine was very useful in saving labor and in other respects, and that he had sold a license lor one to the Brooklyn White Lead Company for $1,500, and another to another company for $1,250, and that he had some negotiations about selling one to the defendants in 1851, and was offered and refused $750, and that the defendants then made and put into operation a machine which the plaintiff claimed was an imitation of his machine, but defendants claimed to be different. The Judge charged the jury that there was no question about the originality of plaintiff's invention, and no difficulty in the construction ol his specification, and that they were to determine whether the defendants' machine was substantially like the plaintiff's. That the difference of form was immaterial, if the principles and idea of the machine were derived from the plaintiff's; that if they found for the plaintiff, he was entitled to damages from the 2nd of August to the commencement of the suit, November 15th, 1852 ; that they must find the actual damage, as the Court had the power to treble the damages ; that the plaintiff is entitled to the profit made by the defendants, by the use ot the machine during that time, as to which it appeared that there was a saving of labor of three men a-day and other savings. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, $275.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American