The portion of the Ohio statute relating to the making and filing proofs was subsequently made the law in Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Nebraska, and Kansas, while the requirement that written obligations given for a patent right should bear such statement written upon its face was made the law in Vermont, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New York, Connecticut, and Arkansas.
In view of the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States in the cases of ex parte Robinson, 2 Bissel, 309, and Webber vs. Virginia, 103 U. S., 347; 20 O. G., 136, some of the States repealed their statutes relating to the[p. 90] filing of proofs, while others did not—notably Indiana and Kansas, where the statute still remains in force.
While the Supreme Court in the above cases did not decide the constitutionality of the State statutes, it was clearly indicated that property in inventions existed by virtue of the laws of Congress, and that no State had any right to interfere with its enjoyment, or to annex conditions to the grant, and that the patentee had a right to go into the open market anywhere in the United States and sell his property. It also established the proposition that a State may require the taking out of a license for the sale of the manufactured article covered by the patent; and the patentee should keep in mind the distinction between selling patents, or patent privileges, and the selling of goods or manufactured articles, as all who sell goods, whether patented or not, must conform with the local and State laws relating to same.
The statute requiring the insertion in written obligations of the words, "Given for a Patent Right," has been declared unconstitutional by the higher State Courts in Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska, and by the Circuit Courts in the southern district of Ohio, and in the district of Indiana; while its validity has been sustained by the courts of last resort in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Kansas. Therefore, the[p. 91] validity of the State statutes on the point referred to may be regarded as finally established in the last-named States until brought before the Supreme Court of the United States.
CHAPTER IX
THE TRANSFER OF PATENT RIGHTS
It frequently occurs to the patentee that a knowledge of the legal requirements of the transfer of patent rights would save him much time and trouble. Patentees should carefully scrutinize all papers offered by the parties in whose favor they are drawn, and, if possible, he should have his attorney to examine them.
There are three classes of persons in whom the patentee can vest an interest of some kind. They are an assignee, a grantee of an exclusive sectional right, and a licensee.