REPORT OF THE PATENT COMMITTEE 11 



the necessary legislation of various national societies, manufacturing 

 interests, bar associations and other elements of the public. 

 Respectfully submitted, 



L. H. BAEKELAND. 



(L. H. BAEKELAND), Acting Chairman, 

 WILLIAM F. DURAND, Chairman (absent in France), 

 EDWIN J. PRINDLE, Secretary, 

 M. I. PUPIN, 



R. A. MlLLIKAN, 



S. W. STRATTON (see reservation below), 

 REID HUNT, 



FREDERICK P. FISH (see reservation below), 

 THOMAS EWING, 

 Approved: JAMES T. NEWTON, 



Commissioner of Patents. 



RESERVATION BY DR. STRATTON 



I agree to the terms of the report with the exception of that portion 

 which refers to the establishment of the Patent Office as a separate gov- 

 ernment institution. It is not quite clear in my own mind that this would 

 be the best thing to do since in general it is best for all government es- 

 tablishments to be represented in the Cabinet. 



S. W. STRATTON. 



RESERVATION BY MR. FISH 



I entirely concur in the substance of the conclusons set out in the above 

 report. 



I think, however, that the words 'if proof is not offered, or' in that por- 

 tion of proposed amendment to Section 4921 which deals with damages 

 and profits, should be omitted so that the sentence in which those 

 words appear should read: 



In the absence of adequate proof of the amount that should be awarded as 

 damages or profits, the Court, on due proceedings had, may adjudge and de- 

 cree to the owner payment of a reasonable royalty or other form of general 

 damages. 



I do not think that a Statute should directly or indirectly contemplate 

 a condition in litigation in which 'proof is not offered.' I believe that 

 the clause which I suggest would accomplish the desired purpose and 

 that the Courts in applying the clause would be embarrassed if the 

 phrase 'if proof is not offered' were in the Statute. 



