United States Consolidated Seeded Raisin Co. v. Griffin & Skelley Co.

Citations

• 126 F. 364
• 61 C.C.A. 334
• 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4330

Syllabus

<p>1. Monopolies — Legality of Contracts — Licenses under Patents.</p> <p>Contracts by which a number of patents covering similar inventions are conveyed by the several owners to one of the parties, which grants licenses under all to the others, are not void as against public policy, or as in violation of the Sherman anti-trust law, because of provisions intended to protect and keep up the patent monopoly by requiring the licensor to prosecute all infringers, limiting the licenses to be granted to such licensees as shall be agreed on, and imposing conditions on each licensee as to the use and ownership of the patented machines, and prohibiting him from using any others.</p> <p>2. Patents — Rights of Patentee — Effect of State Laws.</p> <p>Rights acquired under the patent laws of the United States cannot be affected by a state statute.</p> <p>8. Contracts — Effect of Illegal Provisions — Divisibility.</p> <p>Stipulations in a contract which are invalid as in restraint of trade, if capable of being construed divisibly, do not affect the validity of other provisions.</p> <p>4. Same — Validity—When Question for Jury.</p> <p>Conceding that a contract legal in its terms and in its consideration may be rendered illegal as against public policy by reason of the intention of the parties to so use it as to commit civil injury to third persons, where the evidence as to such intention is conflicting the contract cannot be declared illegal by the court as matter of law.</p> <p>jf 1. Validity of monopolistic contracts as affected by public policy, see note to Cravens v. Carter-Crume Co., 34 C. C. A. 486.</p>