flying machines-第32章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



necessary。







CHAPTER　XXIII。



AMATEURS　MAY　USE　WRIGHT　PATENTS。



Owing　to　the　fact　that　the　Wright　brothers　have　enjoined

a　number　of　professional　aviators　from　using

their　system　of　control；　amateurs　have　been　slow　to

adopt　it。　They　recognize　its　merits；　and　would　like　to

use　the　system；　but　have　been　apprehensive　that　it

might　involve　them　in　litigation。　There　is　no　danger

of　this；　as　will　be　seen　by　the　following　statement　made

by　the　Wrights：



What　Wright　Brothers　Say。



〃Any　amateur；　any　professional　who　is　not　exhibiting

for　money；　is　at　liberty　to　use　our　patented　devices。

We　shall　be　glad　to　have　them　do　so；　and　there　will　be

no　interference　on　our　part；　by　legal　action；　or　otherwise。

The　only　men　we　proceed　against　are　those　who；　without

our　permission；　without　even　asking　our　consent；

coolly　appropriate　the　results　of　our　labors　and　use　them

for　the　purpose　of　making　money。　Curtiss；　Delagrange；

Voisin；　and　all　the　rest　of　them　who　have　used　our

devices　have　done　so　in　money…making　exhibitions。　So

long　as　there　is　any　money　to　be　made　by　the　use　of　the

products　of　our　brains；　we　propose　to　have　it　ourselves。

It　is　the　only　way　in　which　we　can　get　any　return　for

the　years　of　patient　work　we　have　given　to　the　problem

of　aviation。　On　the　other　hand；　any　man　who　wants

to　use　these　devices　for　the　purpose　of　pleasure；　or　the

advancement　of　science；　is　welcome　to　do　so；　without

money　and　without　price。　This　is　fair　enough；　is　it　not？〃



Basis　of　the　Wright　Patents。



In　a　flying　machine　a　normally　flat　aeroplane　having

lateral　marginal　portions　capable　of　movement　to　different

positions　above　or　below　the　normal　plane　of　the

body　of　the　aeroplane；　such　movement　being　about　an

axis　transverse　to　the　line　of　flight；　whereby　said　lateral

marginal　portions　may　be　moved　to　different　angles　relatively

to　the　normal　plane　of　the　body　of　the　aeroplane；

so　as　to　present　to　the　atmosphere　different　angles

of　incidence；　and　means　for　so　moving　said　lateral　marginal

portions；　substantially　as　described。



Application　of　vertical　struts　near　the　ends　having

flexible　joints。



Means　for　simultaneously　imparting　such　movement

to　said　lateral　portions　to　different　angles　relatively　to

each　other。



Refers　to　the　movement　of　the　lateral　portions　on　the

same　side　to　the　same　angle。



Means　for　simultaneously　moving　vertical　rudder　so

as　to　present　to　the　wind　that　side　thereof　nearest　the

side　of　the　aeroplane　having　the　smallest　angle　of　incidence。



Lateral　stability　is　obtained　by　warping　the　end　wings

by　moving　the　lever　at　the　right　hand　of　the　operator；

connection　being　made　by　wires　from　the　lever　to　the

wing　tips。　The　rudder　may　also　be　curved　or　warped　in

similar　manner　by　lever　action。



Wrights　Obtain　an　Injunction。



In　January；　1910；　Judge　Hazel；　of　the　United　States

Circuit　Court；　granted　a　preliminary　injunction　restraining

the　Herring…Curtiss　Co。；　and　Glenn　H。　Curtiss；　from

manufacturing；　selling；　or　using　for　exhibition　purposes

the　machine　known　as　the　Curtiss　aeroplane。　The　injunction

was　obtained　on　the　ground　that　the　Curtiss

machine　is　an　infringement　upon　the　Wright　patents　in

the　matter　of　wing　warping　and　rudder　control。



It　is　not　the　purpose　of　the　authors　to　discuss　the

subject　pro　or　con。　Such　discussion　would　have　no　proper

place　in　a　volume　of　this　kind。　It　is　enough　to　say　that

Curtiss　stoutly　insists　that　his　machine　is　not　an

infringement　of　the　Wright　patents；　although　Judge　Hazel

evidently　thinks　differently。



What　the　Judge　Said。



In　granting　the　preliminary　injunction　the　judge　said：



〃Defendants　claim　generally　that　the　difference　in

construction　of　their　apparatus　causes　the　equilibrium　or

lateral　balance　to　be　maintained　and　its　aerial　movement

secured　upon　an　entirely　different　principle　from　that

of　complainant；　the　defendants'　aeroplanes　are　curved；

firmly　attached　to　the　stanchions　and　hence　are　incapable

of　twisting　or　turning　in　any　direction；　that　the

supplementary　planes　or　so…called　rudders　are　secured　to

the　forward　stanchion　at　the　extreme　lateral　ends　of

the　planes　and　are　adjusted　midway　between　the　upper

and　lower　planes　with　the　margins　extending　beyond　the

edges；　that　in　moving　the　supplementary　planes　equal

and　uniform　angles　of　incidence　are　presented　as

distinguished　from　fluctuating　angles　of　incidence。　Such

claimed　functional　effects；　however；　are　strongly

contradicted　by　the　expert　witness　for　complainant。



Similar　to　Plan　of　Wrights。



〃Upon　this　contention　it　is　sufficient　to　say　that　the

affidavits　for　the　complainant　so　clearly　define　the

principle　of　operation　of　the　flying　machines　in　question

that　I　am　reasonably　satisfied　that　there　is　a　variableness

of　the　angle　of　incidence　in　the　machine　of　defendants

which　is　produced　when　a　supplementary　plane　on　one

side　is　tilted　or　raised　and　the　other　stimultaneously

tilted　or　lowered。　I　am　also　satisfied　that　the　rear

rudder　is　turned　by　the　operator　to　the　side　having　the

least　angle　of　incidence　and　that　such　turning　is　done

at　the　time　the　supplementary　planes　are　raised

or　depressed　to　prevent　tilting　or　upsetting　the　machine。

On　the　papers　presented　I　incline　to　the　view；　as　already

indicated；　that　the　claims　of　the　patent　in　suit　should　be

broadly　construed；　and　when　given　such　construction；

the　elements　of　the　Wright　machine　are　found　in　defendants'

machine　performing　the　same　functional　result。

There　are　dissimilarities　in　the　defendants'　structure

changes　of　form　and　strengthening　of　partswhich　may

be　improvements；　but　such　dissimilarities　seem　to　me　to

have　no　bearing　upon　the　means　adopted　to　preserve　the

equilibrium；　which　means　are　the　equivalent　of　the　claims

in　suit　and　attain　an　identical　result。



Variance　From　Patent　Immaterial。



〃Defendants　further　contend　that　the　curved　or　arched

surfaces　of　the　Wright　aeroplanes　in　commercial　use　are

departures　from　the　patent；　which　describes　'substantially

flat　surfaces；'　and　that　such　a　construction　would

be　wholly　impracticable。　The　drawing；　Fig。　3；　however；

attached　to　the　specification；　shows　a　curved　line　inward

of　the　aeroplane　with　straight　lateral　edges；　and　considering

such　drawing　with　the　terminology　of　the　specification；

the　slight　arching　of　the　surface　is　not　thought

a　material　departure；　at　any　rate；　the　patent　in　issue

does　not　belong　to　the　class　of　patents　which　requires

narrowing　to　the　details　of　construction。〃



〃June　Bug〃　First　Infringement。



Referring　to　the　matter　of　priority；　the　judge　said：



〃Indeed；　no　one　interfered　with　the　rights　of　the

patentees　by　constructing　machines　similar　to　theirs　until

in　July；　1908；　when　Curtiss　exhibited　a　flying　machine

which　he　called　the　'June　Bug。'　He　was　immediately

notified　by　the　patentees　that　such　machine　with　its

movable　surfaces　at　the　tips　of　wings　infringed　the　patent

in　suit；　and　he　replied　that　he　did　not　intend　to　publicly

exhibit　the　machine　for　profit；　but　merely　was　engaged

in　exhibiting　it　for　scientific　purposes　as　a　member

of　the　Aerial　Experiment　Association。　To　this　the　patentees

did　not　object。　Subsequently；　however；　the　machine；

with　supplementary　planes　placed　midway　between

the　upper　and　lower　aeroplanes；　was　publicly　exhibited

by　the　defendant　corporation　and　used　by　Curtiss　in

aerial　flights　for　prizes　and　emoluments。　It　further　appears

that　the　defendants　now　threaten　to　continue　such

use　for　gain　and　profit；　and　to　engage　in　the　manufacture

and　sale　of　such　infringing　machines；　thereby　becoming

an　active　rival　of　complainant　in　the　business　of

constructing　flying　machines　embodying　the　claims　in　suit；

but　such　use　of　the　infringing　machines　it　is　the　duty

of　this　court；　on　the　papers　presented；　to　enjoin。



〃The　requirements　in　patent　causes　for　the　issuance

of　an　injunction　pe