| 翻訳と辞書 |
| A.B. Dick case ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Henry v. A.B. Dick Co.
''Henry v. A.B. Dick Co.''〔(''Henry v. A.B. Dick Co.'' ), 224 U.S. 1 (1912).〕 was a 1912 decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld patent licensing restrictions such as tie-ins on the basis of the so-called inherency doctrine—the theory that it was the inherent right of a patent owner, because he could lawfully refuse to license his patent at all, to exercise the "lesser" right to license it on any terms and conditions he chose. In 1917, the Supreme Court overruled the ''A.B. Dick'' case in ''Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co.'',〔243 U.S. 502 (1917).〕
==Background==
A.B. Dick owned a patent on a mimeograph machine, which was designed to print multiple paper copies of papers by exuding ink through apertures in a stencil onto paper sheets. Dick sold one of the patented machines to Miss Christina B. Skou. A plate had been fastened to the machine, reading that the machine was "sold by the A.B. Dick Company with the license restriction that it may be used only with the stencil, paper, ink, and other supplies made by A. B. Dick." Sidney Henry then sold to Miss Skou a can of ink suitable for use upon the mimeograph machine, with knowledge of the license agreement, and with the expectation that she would use the ink with the machine.〔224 U.S. at 11-12, 26.〕
A.B. Dick then sued Henry in the circuit court for the Southern District of New York, which ruled in favor of Dick.〔''A.B. Dick Co. v. Henry'', 149 Fed. 424 (C.C.S.D.N.Y. 1907).〕 The Second Circuit certified to the Supreme Court the question whether the conduct constituted patent infringement.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Henry v. A.B. Dick Co.」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|