dawson chemical rohm haas argued april decided june title provides hoever sells component patented machine manufacture combination composition material apparatus use practicing patented process constituting material part invention knowing especially made especially adapted use infringement patent staple article commodity commerce suitable substantial noninfringing use shall liable contributory infringer section provides patent owner otherwise entitled relief infringement contributory infringement patent shall denied relief deemed guilty misuse illegal extension patent right reason done one following derived revenue acts performed another without consent constitute contributory infringement patent licensed authorized another perform acts performed without consent constitute contributory infringement patent sought enforce patent rights infringement contributory infringement respondent chemical manufacturer obtained patent method process applying propanil chemical compound herbicide inhibit growth undesirable plants rice crops propanil nonstaple commodity use except practice patented method petitioners manufactured sold propanil application rice crops directions purchasers apply propanil accordance respondent patented method respondent filed suit federal district seeking injunctive relief alleging petitioners contributed infringement patent rights farmers purchased used petitioners propanil petitioners induced infringement instructing farmers apply herbicide petitioners responded requesting licenses patented method respondent refused grant licenses petitioners raised defense patent misuse claiming misuse respondent tied sale patent rights purchase propanil unpatented unpatentable article refused grant licenses propanil producers district granted summary judgment petitioners ground respondent barred obtaining relief infringers attempted illegally extend patent monopoly ruled language specifying conduct deemed patent abuse encompass totality respondent conduct appeals reversed holding specifying conduct deemed patent misuse congress conferred upon patentee right exclude others reserve chooses right sell nonstaples used substantially invention since respondent conduct designed accomplish statute contemplated petitioners misuse defense avail held respondent engaged patent misuse either method selling propanil refusal license others sell commodity pp viewed backdrop judicial precedent involving doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse language structure support respondent contention immunizes conduct charge patent misuse barred seeking relief contributory infringement section identifies basic dividing line contributory infringement patent misuse adopts restrictive definition contributory infringement distinguishes staple nonstaple articles commerce section limitations contributory infringement counterbalanced limitations patent misuse effectively confer upon patentee lawful adjunct patent rights limited power exclude others competition nonstaple goods respondent conduct dissimilar either nature effect three species conduct expressly excluded characterization misuse sells propanil authorizes others use sues contributory infringers protected activities respondent license others sell propanil nothing face statute requires although respondent linkage two protected activities sale propanil authorization practice patented process together single transaction expressly covered petitioners failed identify way tying two expressly protected activities results extension control unpatented materials beyond already allows pp relevant legislative materials especially extensive congressional hearings led final enactment reinforce conclusion designed immunize charge patent misuse behavior similar respondent engaged enacting congress granted patent holders statutory right control nonstaple goods capable infringing use patented invention essential invention advance prior art nothing legislative history show respondent behavior falls outside scope pp interpretation foreclosed decisions following passage patent act contrary petitioners assertion decisions continue apply holdings mercoid investment mercoid regulator even attempt control market unpatented goods use outside patented invention constitute patent misuse effectively construe codify result mercoid decisions distinction supplies controlling benchmark ensures patentee right prevent others contributorily infringing patent affects market invention aro mfg convertible top aro mfg convertible top distinguished pp blackmun delivered opinion burger stewart powell rehnquist joined white filed dissenting opinion brennan marshall stevens joined post stevens filed dissenting opinion post ned conley argued cause filed briefs petitioners rudolf hutz argued cause respondent brief arthur connolly januar bove james mulligan george simmons william lambert iii fay hall eugene bernard argued cause national agricultural chemicals association amicus curiae urging affirmance brief frank neuhauser william wells john conner solicitor general mccree assistant attorney general litvack deputy solicitor general wallace robert nicholson robert allen roger andewelt frederic freilicher filed brief amicus curiae urging reversal briefs amici curiae urging affirmance filed william butler frank northam american chemical society john pickering donald turner robert hammond iii stephen hut chemical manufacturers association paul bell lee cook james marsh roger parkhurst licensing executives society robert morse thomas houser national association manufacturers eric schellin national small business association barry rein stanley lieberstein kenneth madsen new york patent law association philip elman joel hoffman william weissman pharmaceutical manufacturers association timothy tilton howard bremer society university patent administrators et al justice blackmun delivered opinion case presents important question statutory interpretation arising patent laws issue us whether owner patent chemical process guilty patent misuse therefore barred seeking relief contributory infringement patent rights exploits patent conjunction sale unpatented article constitutes material part invention suited commercial use outside scope patent claims answer determine whether respondent owner process patent chemical herbicide may maintain action contributory infringement manufacturers chemical used process resolve issue must construe various provisions congress enacted codify certain aspects doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse previously developed judiciary doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse long interrelated histories idea patentee able obtain relief whose acts facilitate infringement others part law since wallace holmes cas cc idea patentee denied relief infringers attempted illegally extend scope patent monopoly somewhat recent origin goes back least far motion picture patents universal film mfg two concepts contributory infringement patent misuse often juxtaposed concern relationship patented invention unpatented articles elements needed invention practiced doctrines originally developed courts codification patent laws congress endeavored least part substitute statutory precepts general judicial rules governed prior time efforts find expression except otherwise provided title whoever without authority makes uses sells patented invention within term patent therefor infringes patent whoever actively induces infringement patent shall liable infringer whoever sells component patented machine manufacture combination composition material apparatus use practicing patented process constituting material part invention knowing especially made especially adapted use infringement patent staple article commodity commerce suitable substantial noninfringing use shall liable contributory infringer patent owner otherwise entitled relief infringement contributory infringement patent shall denied relief deemed guilty misuse illegal extension patent right reason done one following derived revenue acts performed another without consent constitute contributory infringement patent licensed authorized another perform acts performed without consent constitute contributory infringement patent sought enforce patent rights infringement contributory infringement catalyst litigation chemical compound known scientists referred chemical industry propanil late discovered compound properties made useful selective herbicide particularly well suited cultivation rice applied proper quantities propanil kills weeds normally found rice crops without adversely affecting crops thus permits spraying general areas crops already growing eliminates necessity hand weeding flooding rice fields propanil one several herbicides commercially available use rice cultivation efforts obtain patent rights propanil use herbicide continuous since herbicidal qualities chemical first came light initial contender patent monopoly chemical compound monsanto company monsanto filed first three successive applications patent propanil lengthy proceedings patent office patent finally issued declared invalid however monsanto sought enforce suing rohm haas company rohm haas competing manufacturer direct infringement monsanto rohm haas supp ed aff cert denied district held propanil implicitly revealed prior art dating far back even though use herbicide discovered recently monsanto subsequently dedicated patent public party present suit invalidation monsanto patent cleared way rohm haas respondent obtain patent method process applying propanil patent present lawsuit founded rohm haas efforts obtain propanil patent began efforts finally bore fruit june patent office issued patent wilson patent harold wilson dougal mcray patent contains several claims covering method applying propanil inhibit growth undesirable plants areas containing established crops rohm haas sole owner patent since issuance petitioners chemical manufacturers manufactured sold propanil application rice crops since rohm haas received patent market chemical containers printed directions application accordance method claimed wilson patent petitioners cease manufacture sale propanil patent issued despite knowledge farmers purchasing products infringe patented method applying propanil crops accordingly rohm haas filed suit district southern district texas seeking injunctive relief petitioners ground manufacture sale propanil interfered patent rights complaint alleged petitioners contributed infringement farmers purchased used petitioners propanil also actually induced infringement instructing farmers apply herbicide see petitioners responded suit requesting licenses practice patented method rohm haas refused grant licenses however petitioners raised defense patent misuse counterclaimed alleged antitrust violations respondent parties entered stipulation facts petitioners moved partial summary judgment argued rohm haas misused patent conveying right practice patented method purchasers propanil district granted summary judgment petitioners uspq agreed rohm haas barred obtaining relief infringers patent attempted illegally extend patent monopoly district recognized specifies certain conduct deemed patent misuse ruled however language simply encompass totality rohm haas conduct case uspq held respondent refusal grant licenses implied licenses conferred operation law upon purchasers propanil constituted attempt means tying arrangement effect monopoly unpatented component process district concluded conduct deemed patent misuse judicial decisions preceded held either legislative history language indicates rule modified uspq appeals fifth circuit reversed emphasized fact propanil terminology patent law nonstaple article one commercial use except connection respondent patented invention thorough review judicial developments preceding enactment detailed examination legislative history provision concluded legislation restored patentee protection contributory infringement decisions theretofore undermined secure result congress found necessary cut back doctrine patent misuse appeals determined specifying conduct deemed misuse congress clearly provide patentee right exclude others reserve chooses right sell nonstaples used substantially invention emphasis original since rohm haas conduct designed accomplish statute contemplated ruled petitioners misuse defense avail granted certiorari forestall possible conflict lower courts resolve issue prime importance administration patent law present purposes certain material facts dispute first validity wilson patent question stage litigation therefore must assume respondent lawful owner sole exclusive right use license others use propanil herbicide rice fields accordance methods claimed wilson patent second petitioners dispute manufacture sale propanil together instructions use herbicide constitute contributory infringement rohm haas patent tr oral arg accordingly admit propanil constitutes material part respondent invention especially made especially adapted use infringement patent staple article commodity commerce suitable substantial noninfringing use within language also concede produced sold propanil knowledge used manner infringing respondent patent rights put matter slightly different terms litigation stands petitioners admit commission tort raise defense liability contention respondent engaging patent misuse comes unclean hands result concessions chief focus inquiry must scope doctrine patent misuse light limitations placed upon doctrine subject well task guided certain stipulations concessions parties agree rohm haas makes sells propanil refused license petitioners others granted express licenses either retailers end users product farmers buy propanil rohm haas may use without fear sued direct infringement virtue implied license obtain rohm haas relinquishes monopoly selling propanil see app see also univis lens cf adams burke wall parties agree permit respondent sell propanil sue others sell product without license free demand royalties others sale propanil chose parties disagree whether respondent engaged additional conduct amounts patent misuse petitioners assert misuse respondent tied sale patent rights purchase propanil unpatented indeed unpatentable article refused grant licenses producers chemical compound argue permit sort tying arrangement resort practice excludes respondent category patentees otherwise entitled relief within meaning rohm haas understandably vigorously resists characterization conduct argues acts express mandate excepts characterization patent misuse asserts conduct results extension patent right control unpatented commodity instance extension given express statutory sanction ii mode analysis follows closely trail blazed district appeals axiomatic course statutory construction must begin language statute language generic freighted meaning derived decisional history preceded appeals appropriately observed one interpretation statutory language surface plausibility place proper perspective therefore believe helpful first review detail doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse developed prior congress attempt codify governing principles noted doctrine contributory infringement genesis era simpler less subtle technology basic elements perhaps best explained classic example drawn era wallace holmes cas cc patentee invented new burner oil lamp compliance technical rules patent claiming invention patented combination also included standard fuel reservoir wick tube chimney necessary properly functioning lamp patent issued competitor began market rival product including novel burner chimney sometimes scholastic law patents conduct amount direct infringement competitor replicated every single element patentee claimed combination prouty ruggles pet yet held palpable interference patentee legal rights purchasers certain complete combination hence infringement adding glass chimney permitted patentee enforce rights competitor brought infringement rather requiring patentee undertake almost insuperable task finding suing innocent purchasers technically responsible completing infringement ibid see also bowker dows cas cc mass wallace case demonstrates readily comprehensible setting reason contributory infringement doctrine exists protect patent rights subversion without directly infringing patent engage acts designed facilitate infringement others protection particular importance situations like oil lamp case enforcement direct infringers difficult technicalities patent law make relatively easy profit another invention without risking charge direct infringement see electric ohio brass taft circuit judge miller views law patent infringement inducement pat soc although propriety decision wallace holmes seldom challenged contributory infringement doctrine spawned always enjoyed full adherence contexts difficulty doctrine encountered stems much rejection core concept desire delimit outer contours time concern potential anticompetitive tendencies inherent actions contributory infringement led retrenchment doctrine judicial history contributory infringement thus may said marked period ascendancy doctrine expanded point became subject abuse followed somewhat longer period decline concept patent misuse developed increasingly stringent antidote perceived excesses earlier period doctrine contributory infringement first addressed morgan envelope albany paper case suit manufacturer patented device dispensing toilet paper supplier paper rolls fit patented invention accepted contributory infringement doctrine theory held invoked supplier perishable commodities used patented invention observed contrary outcome give patentee benefit patent ordinary articles commerce result determined unjustified facts case despite wary reception contributory infringement actions continued flourish lower courts eventually doctrine gained wholehearted acceptance leeds catlin victor talking machine upheld injunction contributory infringement manufacturer phonograph discs specially designed use patented combination although disc patented noted essential functioning patented combination method interaction stylus mark ed advance upon prior art also stressed disc capable use patented combination commercially available stylus operate distinguished result morgan envelope board grounds one determining factors stated exists case bar held attempt link two cases confound essential distinctions made patent laws essential distinctions entirely different things contributory infringement doctrine achieved mark decision henry dick case divided extended contributory infringement principles permit conditional licensing arrangement whereby manufacturer patented printing machine require purchasers obtain supplies used connection invention including staple items paper ink exclusively patentee reasoned market supplies created invention sale license use patented product like sale species property limited whatever conditions property owner wished impose dick decision progeny lower courts led vast expansion conditional licensing patented goods processes used control markets staple nonstaple goods alike followed may characterized lens hindsight inevitable judicial reaction motion picture patents universal film mfg signalled new trend continue years thereafter owner patent projection equipment attempted prevent competitors selling film use patented equipment attaching projectors sold notice purporting condition use machine exclusive use film film previously patented patent expired addressed broad issue whether patentee possessed right condition sale patented machine purchase articles part patented machine patented relying upon rule scope patent must limited invention described claims held attempted restriction use unpatented supplies improper restriction invalid film obviously part invention patent suit attempt without statutory warrant continue patent monopoly particular character film expired enforce create monopoly manufacture use moving picture films wholly outside patent suit patent law interpreted broad ramifications motion picture case apparently immediately comprehended series decisions next three decades litigants tested limits carbice american patents denied relief patentee sole licensee authorized use patented design refrigeration package purchasers licensee solid carbon dioxide dry ice refrigerant licensee manufactured refrigerant widely used staple article commerce patent question claimed neither machine making process using held patent holder licensee attempting exclude competitors refrigerant business portion market conduct constituted patent misuse reasoned control supply unpatented material beyond scope patentee monopoly limitation inherent patent grant dependent upon peculiar function character unpatented material way used relief denied licensee attempting without sanction law employ patent secure limited monopoly unpatented material used applying invention decisions similar import followed leitch mfg barber found patent misuse attempt exploit process patent curing cement sale bituminous emulsion unpatented staple article commerce used process eschewed attempt limit rule carbice motion picture cases involving explicit agreements extending patent monopoly stated broad proposition every use patent means obtaining limited monopoly unpatented material prohibited morton salt suppiger involved attempt control market salt tablets used patented dispenser explicitly linked doctrine patent misuse unclean hands doctrine traditionally applied courts equity companion case chemical ellis held patent misuse barred relief even infringement actively induced practical difficulties marketing patented invention justify patent misuse although none decisions purported cut back doctrine contributory infringement generally perceived effect far developing doctrine patent misuse might extend topic speculation among members patent bar decisions yet addressed status contributory infringement patent misuse respect nonstaple goods courts commentators apparently took view control nonstaple items capable infringing use might bar patent protection contributory infringement view soon received serious fatal blow controversial decisions mercoid investment mercoid mercoid regulator mercoid ii cases definitely held attempt control market unpatented goods constitute patent misuse even goods use outside patented invention cases served point departure congressional legislation merit passing citation cases involved single patent claimed combination elements furnace heating system owner patent honeywell licensee although neither company made installed furnace system honeywell manufactured sold stoker switches especially made essential system operation right build use system granted purchasers stoker switches royalties owed patentee calculated number stoker switches sold mercoid manufactured marketed competing stoker switch designed used patented combination mercoid offered sublicense licensee refused take one sued contributory infringement patentee licensee raised patent misuse defense mercoid barred patentee obtaining relief deemed licensing arrangement honeywell unlawful attempt extend patent monopoly opinion painted broad brush prior patent misuse decisions involved attempts secure partial monopoly supplies consumed unpatented materials employed connection practice invention none however involved integral component necessary functioning patented system refused however infer difference principle distinction fact ibid instead stated expansive rule apparently admitted exception necessities convenience patentee justify use monopoly patent create another monopoly fact patentee power refuse license enable enlarge monopoly patent expedient attaching conditions use method monopoly sought extended immaterial patentee ties something else invention acts virtue right owner property make contracts concerning otherwise subject limitations upon right general law imposes upon contracts contract saved anything patent laws relates invention mere act patentee make distinctive claim patent attach something possess quality invention patent diverted statutory purpose become ready instrument economic control domains acts laws patent statutes define public policy mercoid ii add much breathtaking sweep companion decision reinforce however conclusion ruling made exception elements essential inventive character patented combination however worthy may however essential patent unpatented part combination patent entitled monopolistic protection unpatented device emerges review judicial development fairly complicated picture rights obligations patentees contributory infringers varied time need decide respondent fared charge patent misuse particular point prior enactment nevertheless certain inferences pertinent present inquiry may drawn historical developments first agree appeals concepts contributory infringement patent misuse rest antithetical underpinnings traditional remedy contributory infringement injunction inevitable concomitant right enjoin another contributory infringement capacity suppress competition unpatented article commerce see electric kelsey electric specialty cc proponents contributory infringement defend result grounds necessary protection patent right market unpatented article flows patentee invention also observe many instances article unpatented technical rules patent claiming require placement invention context yet suppression competition unpatented goods precisely opponents patent misuse decry patent misuse contributory infringement doctrines coexist must separate sphere operation interfere second find majority cases patent misuse doctrine developed involved undoing damage thought done dick desire extend patent protection control staple articles commerce died slowly ghost expansive contributory infringement era continued haunt courts result among historical precedents leeds catlin mercoid cases bear significant factual similarity present controversy cases involved questions control unpatented articles essential patented inventions unsuited commercial noninfringing use case face similar questions connection chemical propanil herbicidal properties essential advance prior art disclosed respondent patented process like record disc leeds catlin stoker switch mercoid cases unlike dry ice carbice bituminous emulsion leitch propanil nonstaple commodity use except practice patented method accordingly present case arisen prior mercoid believe fair say fallen close wavering line legitimate protection contributory infringement illegitimate patent misuse iii mercoid decisions left wake consternation among patent lawyers degree confusion lower courts although courts treated mercoid pronouncements limited effect specific kind licensing arrangement issue cases others took much expansive view decision among latter group courts held even filing action contributory infringement threatening deter competition unpatented materials supply evidence patent misuse see stroco products mullenbach uspq sd cal state affairs made difficult patent lawyers advise clients questions contributory infringement render secure opinions validity proposed licensing arrangements certain segments patent bar eventually decided ask congress corrective legislation restore scope contributory infringement doctrine great perseverance advanced proposal three successive congresses eventually enacted critical inquiry case enactment affected doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse viewed backdrop judicial precedent believe language structure statute lend significant support rohm haas contention immunizes conduct charge patent misuse barred seeking relief approach congress took toward codification contributory infringement patent misuse reveals compromise two doctrines competing policies permits patentees exercise control nonstaple articles used inventions section identifies basic dividing line contributory infringement patent misuse adopts restrictive definition contributory infringement distinguishes staple nonstaple articles commerce also defines class nonstaple items narrowly essence provision places materials like dry ice carbice case outside scope contributory infringement doctrine result longer necessary resort doctrine patent misuse order deny patentees control staple goods used inventions limitations contributory infringement written counterbalanced limitations patent misuse three species conduct patentees expressly excluded characterization misuse first patentee may deriv revenue acts constitute contributory infringement performed another without consent provision clearly signifies patentee may make sell nonstaple goods used connection invention second patentee may licens authoriz another perform acts without authorization constitute contributory infringement provision use disjunctive term authoriz suggests explicit licensing agreements contemplated finally patentee may enforce patent rights contributory infringement provision plainly means patentee may bring suit without fear regarded unlawful attempt suppress competition statute explicitly patentee may one permitted acts state must view provisions effectively confer upon patentee lawful adjunct patent rights limited power exclude others competition nonstaple goods patentee may sell nonstaple article enjoining others marketing good without authorization able eliminate competitors thereby control market product moreover power demand royalties others privilege selling nonstaple item implies patentee may control market nonstaple good otherwise right sell licenses marketing nonstaple good meaningless since one willing pay superfluous authorization see note yale rohm haas conduct dissimilar either nature effect conduct thus clearly embraced within sells propanil authorizes others use propanil sues contributory infringers protected activities rohm haas license others sell propanil nothing face statute requires sure sum effect rohm haas actions suppress competition market unpatented commodity observed conduct different statute expressly protects one aspect rohm haas behavior expressly covered linkage two protected activities sale propanil authorization practice patented process together single transaction petitioners vigorously argue linkage characterize pejoratively tying supplies otherwise missing element misuse fail however identify way tying two expressly protected activities results extension control unpatented materials beyond already allows nevertheless language explicitly resolve question linkage variety becomes patent misuse order judge whether method exploiting patent lies within without protection afforded must turn legislative history petitioners argue legislative materials indicate modest purpose relying mainly committee reports accompanied act revise codify patent laws act stat part petitioners assert principal purpose congress clarify law contributory infringement developed courts rather effect significant substantive change note act undertook major task codifying patent laws single title argue substantive changes recodifications lightly inferred see ryder argue whatever impact respects kind clear certain signal congress required extension patent privileges see deepsouth packing laitram disagree petitioners assessment view relevant legislative materials abundantly demonstrate intent change law expand significantly ability patentees protect rights contributory infringement act approved virtually floor debate one exchange relevant present inquiry response question whether act effect substantive changes senator mccarran spokesman legislation commented act codif ies patent laws cong rec also submitted statement explained although general purpose act clarify existing law also included several changes taken view decisions others ibid perhaps magnitude recodification effort committee reports accompanying act also gave relatively cursory attention features nevertheless identify one major changes innovations title explaining provisions reports stated intended codify statutory form principles contributory infringement time eliminate doubt confusion resulted decisions courts recent years reports also commented main purpose clarification stabilization ibid materials sufficiently demonstrate act include significant substantive changes one principal sources edification concerning meaning scope however extensive hearings held legislative proposals led final enactment three sets hearings course four years proponents opponents legislation debated impact relationship prior law draftsmen legislation contended restriction doctrine patent misuse enable patentees protect contributory infringers others including representatives department justice vigorously opposed restriction although final version statute reflects minor changes earlier drafts essence legislation remained constant references made later hearings testimony earlier ones accordingly regard set hearings relevant full understanding final legislative product schwegmann calvert distillers transcontinental western air cab together strongly reinforce conclusion designed immunize charge patent misuse behavior similar respondent engaged hearings first bill underlying proposed congress hearings bill origin purpose carefully explained new york patent law association supervised drafting legislation submitted prepared memorandum candidly declared purpose proposal reverse trend decisions indirectly cut back contributory infringement doctrine hearings subcommittee patents copyrights house committee judiciary hearings memorandum explained rationale behind contributory infringement gave one example proper application protection patent use chemical ne supplies hitherto unused chemical public use new method stealing benefit discovery property chemical made new method possible enjoin distributing chemical use new method prevent anything new property chemical discovered ibid testimony proponents bill developed theme giles rich prominent patent lawyer one draftsmen highlighted tension judicial doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse stated early patent misuse decisions seem us doctrine carried far far practically eliminated law doctrine contributory infringement useful legal doctrine illustrate point contrasted carbice mercoid cases noted latter involved item without noninfringing use incorporated distinction definition contributory infringement rich argued bill correct situation left mercoid without giving sanction practices carbice case hearings rich testimony followed robert byerly another draftsman stressed confusion mercoid decisions left lower courts need congress define scope protection contributory infringement drawing clear line deliberate taking another invention legitimate trade staple articles commerce byerly discussed practical difficulties patentees encounter suits direct infringers option protect infringement argued breadth misuse decision mercoid discerned fact overruled leeds catlin hearings explained section bill restricting scope patent misuse intended give patentee recourse either two options man either say sell part invention somebody else complete say yes sell part invention help others complete provided pay royalty bill attracted opponents well defended result mercoid decisions addition roy hackley chief patent section department justice made appearance behalf department took position statutory clarification scope contributory infringement desirable warned congress using language might permit illegal extension patent monopoly hearings ground opposed portion proposed bill included language substantially similar ibid hearings bill come vote patent bar resubmitted proposal fairly extensive hearings debate rich led list favorable witnesses renewed attempt explain legislation terms past decisions result carbice case argued proper patentee tried interfere market old widely used product hand cited mercoid cases examples situation practical way enforce patent except suit contributory infringement party makes thing essentially inventive subject matter put use creates infringement hearings subcommittee house committee judiciary hearings restore doctrine contributory infringement needed rich argued essential restrict pro tanto judicially created doctrine patent misuse like recall dealing problem involves conflict two doctrines contributory infringement misuse crystal clear thoroughly studied subject way make contributory infringement operative doctrine make exceptions misuse doctrine say certain acts shall misuse contributory infringement time becomes operative contributory infringement destroyed misuse doctrine revive anything contributory infringement go back along road get point contributory infringement working hearings department justice pressed vigorous opposition contributory infringement proposal represented john stedman chief legislation clearance section antitrust division department argued legislation unnecessary mercoid decisions correct produced much confusion proponents new legislation claimed legislation produce new interpretive problems hearings stedman defended result mercoid decisions ground marketing techniques employed cases indistinguishable effect tying schemes previously considered took view distinction irrelevant purposes patent misuse owner patent using patent way prevent sale unpatented elements misuse doctrine apply hearings stedman added effect legislation revive leeds catlin decision result department justice opposed hearings later hearings offered several methods exploiting patent rights arguably eliminate need contributory infringement doctrine stated suit contributory infringement involve patent misuse even conditional licensing patent rights stedman opening testimony rich recalled questioning rich agreed stedman assessment effect legislation argued justice department arguments ignored bill limitation contributory infringement nonstaple articles clarify effect statute rich declared absolutely necessary get anywhere direction trying go make exception misuse doctrine conflict doctrine contributory infringement doctrine misuse raises problem exception wish make misuse doctrine reverse result mercoid case reverse result carbice case ibid hearings time proposal statutory law contributory infringement patent misuse presented congress battle lines earlier hearings solidified substantially representatives patent bar found faced formidable opposition department justice opening remarks hearings rich reminded congressional subcommittee practical matter necessary deal contributory infringement misuse doctrines unit tackle problem hearings urged subcommittee need eliminate confusion law left mercoid decisions drawing sensible line contributory infringement patent misuse accordance public policy seems exist today hearings rich also attempted play controversially proposal arguing restrictive definition contributory infringement incorporated bill questioned effect bill present law rich replied extend contributory infringement doctrine unless take point view things sic contributory infringement today rejected suggestion legislation return law contributory infringement dick era reminded subcommittee law touch result carbice decision hearings rich concluded opening testimony explanation subsection deals misuse doctrine reason necessary made abundantly clear exist law today two doctrines contributory infringement one hand misuse conflict misuse doctrine must prevail public interest inherently involved patent cases decisions following mercoid made quite clear least courts going say effort whatever enforce patent contributory infringer misuse therefore always felt study subject particularly put measure contributory infringement law must extent extent specifically make exceptions misuse doctrine purpose paragraph goes supports depends upon paragraph representative crumpacker challenged fugate interpretation statute fugate replied rich advanced construction called upon rich say whether agreed following colloquy took place rich agree fugate interpretation extent testified necessary make exception misuse extent revive contributory infringement paragraph whole section entirely dependent refers contributory infringement refers contributory infringement defined nothing crumpacker words says bringing action someone guilty contributory infringement misuse patent rich true ibid legislative materials discussed bear well meaning assigned materials culled exemplary amply demonstrate intended scope statute consistent theme legislative history statute designed accomplish good deal mere clarification significantly changed existing law change moved direction expanding statutory protection enjoyed patentees responsible congressional committees told contributory infringement wither away misuse rationale mercoid decisions remained barrier enforcement patentee rights told undesirable result deprive many patent holders effective protection patent rights told congress strike sensible compromise competing doctrines contributory infringement patent misuse eliminated result mercoid decisions yet preserved result carbice told proposed legislation achieve effect restricting contributory infringement sphere nonstaple goods exempting control goods scope patent misuse signals ignored fully support conclusion enacting congress granted patent holders statutory right control nonstaple goods capable infringing use patented invention essential invention advance prior art find nothing legislative history support assertion respondent behavior falls outside scope contrary respondent done nothing extend right control unpatented goods beyond line congress drew respondent sure licensed use patented process connection purchases propanil propanil nonstaple product herbicidal property heart respondent invention respondent method business thus essentially method condemned mercoid decisions legislative history reveals designed retreat mercoid regard one factual difference case mercoid licensee mercoid cases offered sublicense alleged contributory infringer offer refused mercoid ii seizing upon difference petitioners argue respondent unwillingness offer similar licenses competitors manufacture propanil legally distinguishes case sets outside argument least three responses first noted permits licensing require accordingly petitioners suggestion import statute requirement simply second petitioners failed adduce evidence legislative history offering license alleged contributory infringer critical factor inducing congress retreat result mercoid decisions indeed leeds catlin decision involve offer license placed congress example kind contributory infringement action statute allow third petitioners argument runs contrary view essence patent grant right exclude others profiting patented invention see continental paper bag eastern paper bag zenith radio hazeltine research petitioners argument accepted force patentees either grant licenses forfeit statutory protection contributory infringement compulsory licensing rarity patent system decline manufacture requirement iv petitioners argue finally interpretation adopted foreclosed decisions following passage act assert subsequent cases continued rely upon mercoid decisions effectively construed codify result decisions rather return doctrine patent misuse earlier stage development disagree cases petitioners turn argument include cited mercoid decisions evidence general judicial hostility use statutorily granted patent monopoly extend patentee economic control unpatented products loew see also laboratories university illinois foundation decisions directly concerned doctrine contributory infringement require evaluate impact holdings mercoid like cases specifically mention decisions see zenith radio hazeltine research state general thrust doctrine patent misuse without attending specific statutory limitations another case deepsouth packing laitram dealt scope direct infringement question consideration whether patent infringed unpatented elements assembled combination outside held assembly constituted direct infringement prior enactment concluded enactment statute effected change regard cited mercoid proposition unless direct infringement contributory infringement occasion focus meaning two decisions touch closely upon issues statutory construction presented aro mfg convertible top aro aro mfg convertible top aro ii decisions emerged single case involving action contributory infringement based manufacture sale specially cut fabric designed use patented automobile convertible top combination neither case however directly address question effect law patent misuse controlling issue aro whether direct infringement patent held purchasers specially cut fabric used repair rather reconstruction patented combination accordingly patent law guilty infringement since direct infringement purchasers held contributory infringement manufacturer replacement tops conclusion rested part holding made change fundamental precept contributory infringement absence direct infringement way conflicts decision petitioners observe aro quote certain passages mercoid decisions standing proposition even single elements constituting heart patented combination within scope patent grant context references mercoid inconsonant view course decision eschewed suggestion legal distinction reconstruction repair affected whether element combination replaced essential distinguishing part invention reasoned standard ascrib one element patented combination status patented invention drew mercoid cases extent described limitations scope patent grant carefully avoided reliance misuse aspect decisions accordingly occasion consider whether degree undermined validity mercoid patent misuse rationale aro ii complicated decision mustered different majorities support various aspects opinion see remand aro became clear decision case eliminated possible grounds charge contributory infringement certain convertible top combinations sold without valid license patentee use tops involved direct infringement patent remained question whether fabric supplied repair might constitute contributory infringement notwithstanding earlier decision aro ii decided several questions statutory interpretation first held repair unlicensed combination direct infringement law preceding enactment statute effect change regard like constructions aro deepsouth packing conclusion concerns statutory provision issue case second held supplying replacement fabrics specially cut use infringing repair constituted contributory infringement held specially cut fabrics installed infringing equipment qualified nonstaple items within language supply similar materials infringing repair treated contributory infringement judicial law designed codify also held requires showing alleged contributory infringer knew combination component especially designed patented infringing regard holdings fully consistent understanding event since petitioners conceded contributory infringement purposes decision scope subsection directly us third held alleged contributory infringer avoid liability reliance doctrine mercoid decisions although decisions cast contributory infringement doubt held enacted express purpose overruling blanket invalidation contributory infringement doctrine found mercoid opinions although review legislative history finds broader intent harmony aro ii analysis explicitly noted defense patent misuse pressed accordingly discussion legislative history limited materials supporting observation sufficient purposes case direct attack contributory infringement doctrine entirety contrary manifest purpose since aro ii faced patent misuse defense occasion consider evidence hearings relating scope finally segment opinion commanded full adherence four justices stated agreement patentee released purchasers infringing combinations liability defeated liability contributory infringement respect replacement convertible tops agreement went effect plurality rejected patentee attempt condition release reserving rights connection future sales replacement fabrics relied carbice mercoid decisions well loew supra proposition patentee impose conditions concerning unpatented supplies ancillary materials components use patented combination effected statement qualified circumstances applied already determined aro replacement wornout convertible top fabric constituted permissible repair combination agreement sought control unpatented article context noninfringing use determination agreement defeated liability reflect resort principles patent misuse rather betokens recognition patentee authorized use combination manufacture contributory infringement contract law none perhaps quintessential difference aro decisions present case difference market chemical process replacement market aro litigation arose distinction legal consequences determinative latter context controlling instead distinction aro found irrelevant characterization replacements supplies controlling benchmark distinction ensures patentee right prevent others contributorily infringing patent affects market invention significant difference legal context believe interpretation conflict decisions since present task one statutory construction questions public policy determinative outcome unless specific policy choices fairly attributed congress instance already stated congress chose compromise competing policy interests policy free competition runs deep law underlies doctrine patent misuse general principle boundary patent monopoly limited literal scope patent claims policy stimulating invention underlies entire patent system runs less deep doctrine contributory infringement called expression law morals mercoid frankfurter dissenting crucial importance ensuring endeavors investments inventor go unrewarded perhaps noteworthy holders new use patents chemical processes among designated congress intended beneficiaries protection contributory infringement designed restore see hearings informed characteristics practical chemical research form patent protection particularly important inventors field number chemicals either known scientists disclosed existing research vast grows constantly engaging pure research publish discoveries number chemicals known uses commercial social value contrast small development new uses existing chemicals thus major component practical chemical research extraordinarily expensive may take years unsuccessful testing chemical desired property identified may take several years testing proper safe method using chemical developed construction petitioners advance rewards available willing undergo time expense interim frustration practical research provide best dubious incentive others await results testing jump profit bandwagon demanding licenses sell unpatented nonstaple chemical used newly developed process refusal accede demand accompanied attempt profit invention sale unpatented chemical risk forfeiture patent protection whatsoever finding patent misuse result noninventors almost assured opportunity share spoils even though contributed nothing discovery incentive await discoveries others might well prove sweeter incentive take initiative oneself whether regime prove workable petitioners urge lead dire consequences respondent several amici insist need predict need determine whether principles free competition justify result congress enactment resolved issues favor broader scope patent protection accord understanding statute hold rohm haas engaged patent misuse either method selling propanil refusal license others sell commodity judgment appeals therefore affirmed ordered wilson patent contains several claims relevant proceeding following illustrative method selectively inhibiting growth undesirable plants area containing growing undesirable plants established crop comprises applying said area rate application inhibits growth said undesirable plants adversely affect growth said established crop method according claim wherein applied composition comprising inert diluent therefor rate pounds per acre uspq sd tex district limited ruling motion partial summary judgment question patent misuse admonished othing ruling construed determinative petitioners antitrust counterclaims uspq counterclaims based inter alia allegations rohm haas engaged coercive marketing practices prior issuance wilson patent charges implicated appeal remain development remand direct conflict number decisions exhibit tension questions patent misuse scope ansul uniroyal supp sdny aff part rev part cert denied sub nom uniroyal louisville chemical rohm haas roberts chemicals harte carpenter uspq sdny sola electric general electric supp nd see also nelson misuse alive pat soc answers complaint petitioners asserted invalidity rohm haas patent variety grounds see contentions yet addressed decided either district appeals follow practice appeals parties using term nonstaple throughout opinion refer component defined unlicensed sale constitute contributory infringement staple component one fit definition recognize terms staple nonstaple always defined precisely fashion see electric ohio brass contributory infringement tort morton salt suppiger patent misuse linked equitable doctrine unclean hands see electric kelsey electric specialty cc american graphophone amet cc nd electric ohio brass supra red jacket mfg davis american graphophone leeds cc sdny wilkins fastener webb cc nd ohio canda michigan malleable iron james heekin baker van devanter circuit judge see vaughan economics patent system collecting cases addition judicial reaction legislative reaction well partly response decision henry dick congress enacted clayton act stat see international business machines subsequent decision rendered term held patent invalid claimed package anticipated prior art carbice american patents case arguably involved application misuse doctrine attempt control nonstaple material arose suit infringement process patent claiming method reinforcing insoles used shoes patentee marketed patented process connection sale canvas duck precoated adhesive use patented process claimed suppliers rival duck fabric suitable use patented method contributed induced infringement patent appeals found patent misuse rejected inter alia patentee contention carbice american patents leitch mfg barber inapplicable duck nonstaple article chemical ellis question whether allegedly nonstaple nature item affected applicability carbice leitch standards presented certiorari see pet cert chemical ellis petitioner brief merits however nonstaple character item pressed ground legal distinction respondents argued material nonstaple see brief petitioner brief respondents pp mention question brief opinion contrast dissent post decline absence articulated reasoning speculate whether accepted respondents view staple commodity involved adopted position failure discuss leeds catlin victor talking machine might suggest simply chose address matter fully presented also disagree dissent attempt post equate unconditional licenses belatedly proposed patentee chemical licensing scheme practiced mercoid investment mercoid regulator see infra see ferguson mfg works american lecithin cert denied johnson philad see philad lechler laboratories see also diamond status combination patents owned sellers element combination pat soc thomas law contributory infringement pat soc even classic contributory infringement case wallace holmes cas cc patentee effort control market novel burner embodied invention arguably constituted patent misuse patentee permitted prevent competitors making selling element argument run power erect monopoly production sale burner unpatented element even though patent right limited control use burner claimed combination see mathews contributory infringement mercoid case pat soc wiles joint trespasses patent property wood tangle mercoid case implications geo rev comment rev compare harris national machine works cert denied nuway hardy aeration processes walter kidde supp wdny detroit lubricator toussaint supp nd hall montgomery ward supp nd galion metallic vault edward budd mfg cert denied chicago pneumatic tool hughes tool supp del aff cert denied landis machinery chaso tool cert denied master metal strip service protex weatherstrip mfg uspq nd stroco products mullenbach uspq sd cal house senate committee reports significant parts identical see sess confine citations text therefore house report see hearings subcommittee house committee judiciary hearings testimony giles rich see testimony mccabe chief engineer mercoid hearings mccabe also testified length hearings petitioners argue exchange hearings among representative crumpacker rich fugate see supra counters interpretation legislative history argue fugate initially interpreted allow tying arrangements construction rejected crumpacker disavowed rich contention ultimately dropped department justice although relevant passage entirely free doubt find petitioners interpretation particularly persuasive rather appears fugate initially interpreted statute insulate patentee charge misuse long also engaged least one practices specified statute see hearings representative crumpacker demurred interpretation rich reminded subcommittee limitation implicitly built scope restrictive definition contributory infringement hearings rich subsequently state attempt secure monopoly unpatented articles still patent misuse context clarification regarding scope subsection agreement proposition appears based assumption unpatented articles referred staples commerce taken whole exchange suggests afford defense charge misuse attempt control staple materials view support conclusion attempt control nonstaple materials subject charge compulsory licensing patents often proposed never enacted broad scale see compulsory licensing patents systems study subcommittee patents trademarks copyrights senate committee judiciary comm print although compulsory licensing provisions considered possible incorporation revision patent laws dropped final bill circulated see house committee judiciary proposed revision amendment patent laws preliminary draft comm print concurring opinion aro justice black address scope conclusion inconsistent today decision march chemical registry system maintained american chemical society listed excess known chemical compounds list grows rate per year society estimates list comprises compounds ever prepared see brief american chemical society amicus curiae example average cost developing one new pharmaceutical drug estimated run high million hansen pharmaceutical development process estimates development costs times effects proposed regulatory changes issues pharmaceutical economics chien ed see wardell history drug discovery development regulation issues pharmaceutical economics chien ed describing modern techniques testing requirements development pharmaceuticals although testing chemicals destined pharmaceutical use may extensive testing environmental effects chemicals used industrial agricultural settings also expensive prolonged see wechsler harrison neumeyer evaluation possible impact pesticide legislation research development activities pesticide manufacturers environmental protection agency office pesticide programs pub see generally baines bradbury suckling research chemical industry justice white justice brennan justice marshall justice stevens join dissenting decades denied relief contributory infringement patent holders attempt extend patent monopolies unpatented materials used connection patented inventions refuses apply patent misuse principle area attempts restrain competition likely successful holds exempt patent misuse doctrine patent holder refusal license others use patented process unless purchase unpatented product substantial use except patented process sole justification radical departure prior construction patent laws interpretation provision created exceptions misuse doctrine held must strictly construed light nation historical antipathy monopoly deepsouth packing laitram recognizes must face exempt broad category nonstaple materials misuse doctrine yet construes based gleaned testimony private patent lawyers given hearings congressional committees testimony department justice attorneys opposing bill often warned construing statutes extremely wary testimony committee hearings debates floor congress save precise analyses statutory phrases sponsors proposed laws contractors expressed similar reservations statements opponents bill fears doubts opposition authoritative guide construction legislation sponsors look meaning statutory words doubt schwegman calvert distillers nlrb fruit packers nothing support novel construction found committee reports statements congressmen senators sponsoring bill focuses opposing positions nonlegislators none find sufficient constitute clear certain signal congress required construing patent act extend patent monopoly beyond standards parties litigation well courts agree respondent refusal license use patent except purchase unpatented propanil deemed patent misuse bar recovery contributory infringement long line decisions commencing motion picture patents universal film mfg denied recovery patent holders attempt extend patent monopoly unpatented materials used connection patented inventions motion picture patents held license use patented motion picture projector conditioned purchase unpatented film patent holder emphasized exclusive right granted every patent must limited invention described claims patent competent owner patent effect extend scope patent monopoly restricting use materials necessary operation part patented invention patent misuse doctrine came known enunciated carbice american patents development carbice unanimously denied relief contributory infringement patentee required users combination patent purchase exclusive licensee unpatented material dry ice essential component patented combination container transporting frozen goods acknowledged owner process patent properly prohibit entirely manufacture sale use packages grant licenses upon terms consistent limited scope patent monopoly charge royalty license fee however concluded patent holder may exact condition license unpatented materials used connection invention shall purchased licensor relief one supplies unpatented materials denied deemed immaterial fact unpatented refrigerant one necessary elements patented product patent holder right free competition sale solid carbon dioxide dry ice limitation inherent patent grant dependent upon peculiar function character unpatented material way used owner combination patent permitted restrain competition unpatented materials used manufacture owner patent machine might thereby secure partial monopoly unpatented supplies consumed operation leitch mfg barber without dissent denied relief holder process patent licensed purchased unpatented material used patented process rather expressly tying grant patent license purchase unpatented material patent holder leitch merely sold unpatented materials used patented process thereby granting purchasers implied license use patent deemed distinction without legal significance every use patent means obtaining limited monopoly unpatented material prohibited emphasized patent misuse doctrine applies whatever nature device owner patent seeks effect unauthorized extension monopoly ibid four years later without dissent applied patent misuse doctrine prohibit recovery direct infringer patent holder required purchasers patented product buy unpatented material use patented product morton salt suppiger companion case denied relief contributory infringement patent holder licensed purchased unpatented component product specially designed use patented process chemical ellis chemical lower courts rejected patent owner attempt distinguish previous patent misuse cases involving efforts control use staple materials substantial noninfringing uses affirmed without dissent holding patent misuse doctrine barred relief view petitioner use patent means establishing limited monopoly unpatented materials chemical ellis supra necessarily rejecting petitioner position patent misuse limited staple products apply alleged infringer went beyond selling unpatented staple material manufactured sold materials useful patented construct rejected patent holder argument able license purchasers unpatented material practicable way exploit process patent patent monopoly enlarged reason fact convenient patentee avail benefits within limits grant however reserved question whether patent misuse doctrine apply patent holder also willing license manufacturers purchase unpatented material ibid decisions established even decisions mercoid cases mercoid investment mercoid mercoid regulator mercoid ii patent misuse doctrine bar recovery patent holder refused license others use patented process unless purchased unpatented product use process conduct deemed patent misuse involved attempt extend patent monopoly beyond scope invention restrain competition sale unpatented materials conduct deemed misuse regardless whether effected means express conditions patent licenses policy granting implied licenses purchasers unpatented materials even though unpatented materials tied license use integral part patented structure ii respondent conduct case clearly constitutes patent misuse decisions respondent refuses license others use patented process unless purchase unpatented propanil fact respondent accomplishes end practice granting implied licenses purchase propanil devoid legal significance alter conclusion leitch mfg chemical moreover fact propanil nonstaple product substantial use except patented process without significance least since chemical serves reinforce conclusion respondent attempting extend patent monopoly unpatented materials propanil substantial noninfringing use sold without incurring liability contributory infringement unless vendor license sell propanil vendee unconditional license use patented process respondent refusal license purchase propanil thus effectively subjects competing sellers propanil liability contributory infringement recognizes ante conduct deemed patent misuse respondent acquire ability eliminate competitors thereby control market propanil even though propanil unpatented unpatentable public domain permit even complete extension patent monopoly market unpatented materials result patentee attempts control sales staples substantial alternative uses outside patented process iii despite undoubted exclusionary impact respondent conduct market unpatented propanil holds conduct longer constitutes patent misuse solely congressional enactment section stranger previous attempts construe statute guided principle expand patent rights overruling modifying prior cases construing patent statutes unless argument expansion privilege based mere inference ambiguous statutory language deepsouth packing laitram light nation historical antipathy monopoly concluded require clear certain signal congress approving position litigant respondent argues beachhead privilege wider area public use narrower courts previously thought principles less applicable resolve statutory question presented case concedes language resolve question nothing legislative materials forced turn furnishes necessary evidence congressional intention section provides patent owner otherwise entitled relief infringement contributory infringement patent shall denied relief deemed guilty misuse illegal extension patent right reason done one following derived revenue acts performed another without consent constitute contributory infringement patent licensed authorized another perform acts performed without consent constitute contributory infringement patent sought enforce patent rights infringement contributory infringement appeals conceded foregoing plausible construction statutory language yet chose instead interpret subsection granting respondent right exclude others reserve chooses right sell nonstaples used substantially invention based conclusion reasoning rights license another sell nonstaple unpatented items rendered worthless right conferred right sell item one competitor among many freely competing reasoning ignores fact royalties may collected competitors selling unpatented nonstaples still must obtain licenses patentee also fundamentally inconsistent congressional policy preserve foster competition sale unpatented materials policy recognized survived enactment deepsouth packing laitram supra aro mfg convertible top replacement aro aro mfg convertible top replacement aro ii subsection leaves respondent free deriv revenue sales propanil without thereby deemed guilty patent misuse free respondent derive monopoly profits sale unpatented product refusing license competitors purchase unpatented product acknowledges respondent refused license others sell propanil observes nothing face statute requires ante cf ante much conceded follow respondent absolved finding patent misuse section define conduct constitutes patent misuse rather simply outlines certain conduct patent misuse terms statute terms exception absence express mention licensing requirement indicate respondent refusal license others protected much seems elementary legislative history indicate congress intended exempt respondent conduct application patent misuse doctrine already addressed subject least rough consensus impetus congressional action aro ii supra held congress enacted express purpose reinstating doctrine contributory infringement developed decisions prior mercoid overruling blanket invalidation doctrine found mercoid opinions see hearings subcommittee house committee judiciary sess aro opinions justice black nn justice harlan justice brennan justice black stated aro designed specifically prevent mercoid case interpreted mean effort enforce patent contributory infringer constitutes forefeiture patent rights concurring opinion passages indicate parties agree impetus enactment decisions mercoid cases case involved suit owner combination patent seeking relief contributory infringement company sold unpatented article useful connection patented combination unlike situation chemical ellis alleged contributory infringer case refused offer license make use sell components combination patent conditioned upon purchase unpatented materials investment mercoid mercoid ii despite offers license denied relief grounds patentees misusing patents extend scope patent monopoly unpatented articles useful connection patents justice douglas speaking mercoid concluded result decision together preceded limit substantially doctrine contributory infringement residuum may left need stop consider light suggestion doctrine contributory infringement might survived mercoid onsiderable doubt confusion scope contributory infringement confusion understandable mercoid decisions first time applied patent misuse doctrine situations contributory infringers refused accept patent licenses conditioned purchase unpatented materials patentee indicated aro ii supra express purpose legislation reinstate doctrine contributory infringement existed prior mercoid overrule implication mercoid made mere act suing contributory infringement form patent misuse nevertheless follows course quite odds prior approach construction conceding language section support result turns legislative history section discovers nothing favoring position committee reports floor debates materials originating legislators sponsored managed bill intimate connection legislation left opinions private patent attorneys meaning proposed legislation hearing testimony representatives department justice opposing bill generally reluctant rely citations definitive guidance construing legislation particularly means departing standards announced prior cases construing legislation however may testimony patent attorneys given committee hearings support broad holding congress intended give patent holders complete control nonstaple materials otherwise public domain section declare selling material apparatus use practicing patented process constituting material part invention knowing material apparatus especially made especially adapted use infringement patent contributory infringement long material apparatus staple article commodity commerce making selling nonstaples especially made adapted use practicing patent contributory infringement making selling staples however useful practicing patent follow patentee never subject defense patent misuse seeks control sale nonstaple used connection patent section specifies precisely acts may perform respect nonstaple guilty patent misuse principal witness relies explained acts specified exceptions otherwise might considered patent misuse mercoid decision hearings subcommittee house committee judiciary hereinafter hearings offers little support position intended put nonstaples completely beyond reach misuse doctrine otherwise simply stated patentee appropriate remedies contributory infringement defined section without regard defense patent misuse course precisely result arrives extends exemption far beyond committees told effect indeed representations aside exemptions spelled patentee control nonstaples subject doctrine patent misuse ibid also apparent private patent attorneys understood act destroying defense patent misuse confining defense reach said chemical denied patentee relief connection nonstaple article left open whether true licenses available refused alleged infringers mercoid patentee case emphasized brief brief respondent investment nos pp repeatedly refused licenses nevertheless held misuse defense barred relief extent overturned mercoid intended arm patentee power sue unlicensed contributory infringers selling nonstaple components used connection patented process understand committee witnesses pressed hearings suggest authorized patentee condition use process purchasing unpatented material exclude market manufacturers sellers even though willing pay reasonable royalty patent owner example listening witness member committee stated words says bringing action someone guilty contributory infringement misuse patent witness response true hearings quarrel reading reading falls far short insulating patentee misuse defense refuses licenses competing manufacturers unpatentable nonstaple conditions use patented process user buying nonstaple patentee thereby employing patent profit manufacture sale article public domain patent misuse mercoid fail find convincing evidence congressional materials indicate congress intended overturn prior law respect apparent overstates legislative record says ante congress told contributory infringement confined nonstaples also exempt control goods scope patent misuse find statement among quoted cited add even applicability patent misuse doctrine nonstaple materials settled mercoid overturning mercoid infringer refused license resolve case patentee refuses licenses others reserves entire market unpatentable nonstaple article lying public domain may true emphasizes ante concepts contributory infringement patent misuse rest antithetical foundations follow price coexistence inevitably must wholesale suppression competition markets unpatentable nonstaples offers reasons policy obvious extension patent monopoly whether stimulate research development chemical field necessary give patentees monopoly control articles covered patents question congress decide wait body speak clearly accordingly respectfully dissent footnotes patent involved chemical ellis covered process reinforcing shoe insoles applying strips reinforcing material coated adhesive rather expressly licensing shoe manufacturers use patented process patentee sold precoated reinforcing material slit strips suitable width use patented method thereby granting purchasers implied licenses use patent patentee argued appeals first circuit application patent misuse doctrine limited situations alleged contributory infringer supplies staple articles commerce appeals noted patentee insists articles supplied specially manufactured use particular patented process relief denied patentee matter course business ibid appeals expressly agreeing appeals second circuit disagreeing contrary view appeals ninth circuit rejected view noted language leitch mfg barber carbice american patents development extremely comprehensive means restricted staple articles every indication carbice leitch cases apply specially designed articles emphasis fact articles sold alleged contributory infringers covered plaintiff patent although conducted business though pursued distinction petition certiorari arguing patent misuse principle carbice american patents development supra leitch mfg barber supra bar relief unpatented materials furnished defendants staple articles commerce rather especially designed prepared use process patent pet also noted conflict among courts appeals respect nonstaples patent misuse urged certiorari granted basis granted certiorari appeals affirmed petitioner arguments patent misuse doctrine bar relief defendant make sell unpatented staple brief petitioner pp petitioner brief also called attention conflict cases respondents amicus curiae argued nonstaples well staples subject misuse doctrine brief respondents pp brief amicus curiae pp issue plainly abandoned part parcel petitioner argument defendant went beyond selling staple manufacturing selling materials expressly designed usable part patented use argument rejected authority companion case morton salt suppiger two years chemical mercoid investment mercoid regulator confronted question reserved chemical whether patent misuse doctrine apply patent holder whose offers license contributory infringers refused although willing concede chemical arguably involved application misuse doctrine attempt control nonstaple material ante subsequently among historical precedents leeds catlin victor talking machine mercoid cases bear significant factual similarity present controversy ante latter statement particularly puzzling chemical like case involved patentee initial refusal license others sell nonstaples mercoid unlike case involved contributory infringer refusal accept proffered licenses moreover implies ante mercoid division courts appeals regard whether patent misuse doctrine applied patentees attempting control nonstaple items yet authorities cites chemical apparent chemical mercoid treated staple nonstaple materials alike insofar patent misuse concerned especially interesting cites ferguson works american lecithin cert denied decision supporting inapplicability misuse doctrine efforts control nonstaples case decision appeals first circuit appeals chemical expressly indicated decision ferguson imply patent misuse doctrine inapplicable patentee efforts control nonstaples chemical appeals held patent misuse doctrine applied nonstaples well staples affirmed respondent efforts use process patent exclude effect propanil public domain particularly ironic prior litigation respondent successfully maintained sued infringement propanil unpatentable lack novelty monsanto rohm haas although acknowledges previously construed ante ignores principles statutory construction followed cases apparently cases involve precise question presented case fails explain however need clear certain signal congress less urgent case appeals noted petitioner interpretation plausible also supported numerous commentators legislative history crystal clear subsequent construction cut reading statute respondent may collect royalties licenses right license competing sellers propanil without economic value event even efficient profitable respondent collect returns exacting monopoly profits sale propanil justify extension patent monopoly market unpatented materials chemical ellis see supra like appeals concludes despite silence statutory language must effectively confer upon patentee lawful adjunct patent rights limited power exclude others competition nonstaple goods ante recognizes anticompetitive impact holding bases conclusion assertion patentee power demand royalties others privilege selling nonstaple items implies patentee may control market nonstaple good otherwise right sell licenses marketing nonstaple good meaningless since one willing pay superfluous authorization ibid fail see however license practice patented process sense superfluous said competitors selling propanil still required obtain patent licenses respondent fact royalties collected licenses might effect propanil market follow respondent may refuse grant licenses thereby excluding competitors propanil market fact respondent may refuse license competing sellers propanil purchase product inconsistent notion patent holder free suppress invention reserve entirely respondent may discontinue sales propanil licensing patented process yet continue use propanil patented process without guilty patent misuse may sell propanil others thus granting patent licenses operation law refusing license competing sellers propanil thus effectively excluding market contractors section limitation contributory infringement doctrine sales nonstaples establish exemptions contained relevant infringement actions sellers nonstaples equally applicable infringement actions brought fact intended work major repeal patent misuse doctrine reflected treatment legislation received floor house senate appeals recognized debate house floor scant comment senate prior senate vote senator mccarran chairman judiciary committee responsible bill senate asked senator saltonstall bill change law way codify present patent laws senator mccarran replied codifies present patent laws cong rec although senator mccarran later referred desire clarify confusion may arisen mercoid indication legislation work major repeal patent misuse doctrine justice department opposition congressional enactment indicate statute intended immunize respondent conduct case often cautioned danger interpreting statute reliance upon views legislative opponents zeal defeat bill understandably tend overstate reach nlrb fruit packers justice stevens dissenting patentee offered licenses either competing sellers propanil consumers except implied license granted every purchase propanil thus every license granted patent conditioned purchase unpatented product patentee classic case patent misuse justice white demonstrates dissenting opinion nothing excludes type conduct misuse doctrine may led reaching contrary view erroneous conclusion particular facts case appears particularly profitable exploit patent granting express licenses fixed terms users propanil granting licenses competing sellers circumstances patent may well little commercial value unless patentee permitted engage patent misuse surely good reason interpreting permit misuse logic holding seem justify extension patent monopoly unpatented nonstaples even cases patent profitably exploited without misuse thus example appears decision allow manufacturer condition lease patented piece equipment lessee agreement purchase tailormade nonstaple supplies components use equipment exclusively patentee whether five members joined today revision apply nonstaple exception case remains seen events respectfully dissent reasons stated justice white opinion join