was infringing a patent about to be issued; and after the issuance of
the patent, without making any inquiry into the process used by
such competitor, threatened to begin suit unless the making of invert
sugar sirup was discontinued and the equipment and stock turned
over to it, with the result that such competitor, although using a
different acid, turned over its equipment and stock at cost and ceased
to do further business, held, under the circumstances set forth, to
constitute an unfair method of competition. (Nulomoline Co.,
1 F. T. C. 400.)

17. Dye soap.-Falsely stating to customers and prospective cus-
tomers of a competitor by a corporation engaged in the manufacture
and sale of dye soap, with intent to injure competitor's business,
that in a suit against him for infringement of patents it had been
granted an injunction restraining the sale of his products, held, under
the circumstances set forth, to constitute unfair competition. (Sun-
beam Chemical Co. (Inc.), 3 F. T. C. 365.)

18. Blowers, forges, and drills.—A corporation engaged in the
manufacture and sale of blowers, forges, and drills, falsely wrote a
wholesaler that said line was fully protected by patents, stating that
he had secured a verdict against a competitor for infringement,
thereby inducing said wholesaler to cease buying competitor's forges
and drills; and said corporation further falsely stated to another
wholelsaler, thereby misleading him to believe that all of his products
and particularly his "Four Hundred" line of blowers and forges and
"Two Hundred" line of drills were covered by patents, which he
would infringe by dealing in said competitor's corresponding product,
held that such misrepresentations, under the circumstances set forth,
constituted unfair methods of competition. (Champion Blower &
Forge Co., 3 F. T. C. 137.)

19. Aspirin.-A corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale
of drugs, including acetyl salicylic acid popularly known as "Aspirin,”
registered the word as a general trade-mark in a large number of
States, accompanying its application for registration with affidavits
that it alone had the right to use the word, and thereafter threatened
numerous purchasers and dealers with suits for infringement if they
used the word on the products of any other concern. This was done
notwithstanding the fact that long prior to said attempted appropri-
ation thereof, the word had been continuously, openly, and notoriously
applied by numerous other manufacturers and dealers to the product
acetyl salicylic acid, held, that such practices, under the circumstances
set forth constituted unfair methods of competition. (Albany
Chemical Co., 3 F. T. C. 369.)

105756-22--9

VI. PRICES.

20. By mail-order house.-Advertising by a mail-order house, in such a manner as to lead the public to believe that its competitors did not deal fairly, justly and honestly with their customers, to wit, that they charged them more than a fair price for their sugar, held, under the circumstances set forth to constitute an unfair method of competition. (Sears, Roebuck & Co., 1 F. T. C. 163; Gordon-Van Tyne Co., 1 F. T. C. 316.)

21. Same. The listing of certain standard products, such as sugar and flour, at prices below their wholesale cost and other items at prices greater than current retail prices by a firm engaged in the sale of groceries by mail, exclusively in combination orders which were of comparatively small size, without letting purchasers know that sugar and flour were priced on a different basis than other commodities, thereby deceiving them as to the prices of all, held, under the circircumstances, to be an unfair method of competition. (Liberty Wholesale Grocers, 3 F. T. C. 103.)

22. Same.-Falsely representing on the part of a corporation engaged in the sale of groceries by mail, exclusively in combination orders so assembled that each assortment contained one or more items, quality and retail price of which were well known to the purchasing public, and other items, the greater part of the assortment, the quality and retail price of which were not well known, that the prices both of assortments and items composing the same were less than those of its competitor's for similar assortments and items, held, under the circumstances set forth, to constitute an unfair method of competition. (Big Four Grocery Co., 3 F. T. C. 338.)

23. By manufacturers.—Where, at the request of its customers' dealers and for the purpose and with the effect of permitting them to make radical and abnormal discounts to ultimate purchasers and still receive the customary prices for such instruments, a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of pianos and piano players, stenciled thereon abnormally and unreasonably high fictitious values, with tendency and effect of deceiving purchasers and the public into believing that such stenciled prices represented resale values based on cost plus a reasonable profit, and that the corporation required or intended its customers to observe the same, such practice having a tendency to impede or suppress competition, held that such practice, under the circumstances set forth, constituted an unfair method of competition. (Holland Piano Manufacturing Co., 3 F. T. C. 31.)

VII. MISCELLANEOUS.

24. Advertising matter presented as news articles and editorials.-An individual engaged in the printing and sale of a publication, never offered to the public generally nor sent through the mails, but purporting to be a regular mercantile and financial periodical, with the purpose of misleading the public as to the true character of such publication, included matter purporting to be mercantile and financial news articles and editorials, but which were, in fact, solicited advertisements, constituting the publication's sole source of income and paid for by the purchase of a definite number of copies of the particular issue; held that such misleading course of conduct constituted an unfair method of competition. (W. G. Hanson, doing business under the name and style of The Mercantile & Financial Times Publishing Co., 2 F. T. C. 381.)

25. As to inventor of certain machinery.-An agent of a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of portable conveying machinery represented to customers and prospective customers of the corporation's competitors, without the corporation's knowledge, that a certain competitor was misleading its (corporation's) competitors and customers and prospective customers by falsely stating to them that a certain Eugene Brown was the inventor of the portable elevator manufactured and sold by such competitors, but that the said Brown was not the inventor of the machinery sold by such competitor and was not in any way connected with the manufacture of any elevator; whereas, in fact, the said Brown was the inventor of a portable warehouse elevator upon which letters patent duly issued to him, and for some years had been an officer of a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of portable conveying machinery; held that such false and misleading statements, under the circumstances set forth, constituted an unfair method of competition. (Brown Portable Conveying Machinery Co., 2 F. T. C. 143.)

26. Its own and competitor's employees. Representing, on the part of a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of outfits and devices for the storage, handling, and automatic measuring of oils, gasoline, etc., to its own customers and to customers of competitor, that its sales agents and other employees were sales agents and employees of a competitor; that the sales agents and other employees of a competitor were its sales agents, and that it and the competitor were one and the same concern, held to constitute unfair methods of competition. (Wayne Oil Tank & Pump Co., 1 F. T. C. 259.)

27. The intentions of competitor.-An employee of a corporation engaged in the sale and distribution of fire extinguishers and similar products, who had been an employee of a concern handling competitive goods, abstracted confidential trade matter and records of the

latter concern while in its employ, and obtained the sole selling agency of the goods heretofore handled by the competing concern by falsely representing that said competitor was about to discontinue handling such goods, held, that such acts on the part of said employee constituted unfair methods of competition. (Allen Sale Service (Inc.), C. Louis Allen and Wm. H. Yetman, 1 F. T. C. 459.)

28. Indorsement accorded business.-Falsely representing, on the part of a corporation organized for the ostensible purpose of manufacturing and selling automobiles, by articles, letters, etc., written by disinterested parties, that said parties indorsed and praised the corporation, its officers, and organization, when in fact said articles had not been written voluntarily, and their further use and circulation had been forbidden, held, under the circumstances set forth, to constitute an unfair method of competition. (Pan Motor Co., Samuel C. Pandolfo, 2 F. T. C. 413.)

29. Methods of manufacture.-Publishing, on the part of a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of invert sugar sirup, false statements to the effect that it was the only concern that had ever produced an acidless invert sugar sirup on a commercial basis, and that its product differed fundamentally from all other known invert sugars, inasmuch as it was not inverted with the usual acids or enzymes, nor put through any of the well-known processes, and that its product was an acidless inverted sugar, and that no acid was used in its manufacture, when as a matter of fact, invert sugar had been made and sold commercially many years before the corporation began making it, held, under the circumstances set forth, to constitute an unfair method of competition. (Nulomoline Co., 1 F. T. C. 400.) 30. Originality of process.-Publishing, on the part of a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of invert sugar sirup, statements to the effect that prior to the beginning of the manufacture of its product, invert sugar was not produced on a commercial scale because it was impossible to produce inversion without the use of dangerous and expensive acids, alkalies, and enzymes; whereas invert sugar had been made without the use of dangerous and expensive acids, etc., and sold commercially many years before the corporation began making it, held, under the circumstances set forth, to constitute an unfair method of competition. (Nulomoline Co., 1 F. T. C. 400.)

USING PORTRAIT AND SIGNATURE OF

AUTHOR WITHOUT CONSENT.

"Where the name, portrait, and facsimile signature of another are employed without his consent and against his will, and are so assumed with a view to deceive the public into the belief that the product

marketed and sold was prepared under his supervision, and offered to the public with his sanction, an injunction will be granted.” (Syllabus.) (Kathreiner's Malzkaffee Fabriken Mit Beschraenkter Haftung et al. v. Pastor Kneipp Medicine Company, 82 Fed. 321.)

OLD AND SECOND-HAND AND RECONSTRUCTED GOODS. [See Advertising falsely and misleadingly; Misbranding; Misrepresentation.]

ORIGIN OF GOODS.

[See Advertising falsely and misleadingly; Confusion; Misbranding.]

PASSING OFF.

[See Appropriation; Confusion; Misbranding; Misrepresentation; Simulation.]