Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Aro Manufacturing Company v. Convertible Top Replacement Company…

How can a court decide whether a person who has bought and owns a patented commodity composed of a combination of unpatented elements is actually making a new one so as to infringe the patent, rather than merely replacing a worn-out part or parts necessary to continue the use of the commodity, which does not constitute patent infringement?
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Aro Manufacturing Company v. Convertible Top Replacement Company…

But to what avail these congressional precautions if this Court, by its opinions, would subject small businessmen to the devastating uncertainties of nebulous and permissive standards of infringement under which courts could impose treble damages upon them for making parts, distinct, separable, minor parts, or even major parts of a combination patent, upon which parts no patent has been or legally could have been issued.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature