The passage of such a bill (8.4442) would, we think, mean that in practically every suit is brought on a patent by a company case where which owns any as considerable number of patents and, is usual, has licensing arrangements with other companies, the defendant would set up a defense based upon this act, and we should have, instead of a simple patent suit, an anti-trust agency but by relations suit, prosecuted not by a defendant prying into of the plaintiff, consequences of his in an any all effort misappropriation of governmental the business to avoid the property rights. The result might well be that rather than the annoyance and expense of trying out such undergo defense, effort to the patent stop the owner would infringement. prefer The to make a no secondary result would be to make patents less valuable and to discourage invention and the development of new processes, machines and products, which would be disastrous. means fhe confined evil effect to of the bill corporations. It would would be by no equally affect individual inventors whose market for their inventions is the manufacturing corporations. If patents in the hands of these corporations became of no value because, if the corporation attempts to enforce them, it is confronted with what is in effect and anti-trust suit, then the corporations will not buy patents from inventors and the individual inventor will be the loser. reparably The industries of our country would be injured if there: should be legislation pering discouraging or or cross-licensing dustries have of the full same freedom patents. story to All tell. in the our modern They irham- licensing are in- in every case the result of the efforts of many inventors. Frequently no one concern owns all the patents necessary for the production of a satisfactory product. If it were not for licensing and cross-licensing and the fact that the law has been liberal in giving opportunity for the easy transfer of patent rights, all our industries would have been checked to an intolerable quite extent incapable and of many sound of them would have been development. Apparently under Section 3 of the bill the whole anti-trust law issue would have to be finally determined before the merits of the controversies could be touched. This might involve not only an appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeal, but even review by the Supreme Court on this preliminary matter,