Healthcare in New Hampshire. Specifically

¶ … healthcare in New Hampshire. Specifically it will discuss whether Glenn Curtiss was guilty of infringement on the Wright Brothers' patents. Glenn Curtiss is one of the forgotten pioneers of American aviation. He actually invented what is now known as the "flying boat," and pioneered naval aviation. Known as the "Father of Navy Aviation," he also invented airplanes and aviation technologies, and was engaged in a legendary battle with the Wright Brothers over patent infringement accusations.

The Wright Brothers, as just about everyone knows, were the first to successfully fly an airplane at Kitty Hawk in 1903. By 1906, they had received a patent for their airplane, to protect their design. The Centennial of Flight Web site notes, "The Wright brothers were granted a patent by the U.S. Patent Office in 1906 for a flying machine. This patent was based on the application they had submitted in 1903 that had included a detailed description and drawings of their control system as applied to a glider" (Editors, 2009). Of course, there was interest by other inventors in aviation, and one of those innovators was Glenn Curtiss, who was one of the first members of the Aerial Experiment Association (AEA) in the country. Alexander Graham Bell, who the Wrights respected, actually funded the group and members of the AEA actually wrote to the Wrights for information on airplane building, and the Wrights answered, even referring to their patent (Editors, 2009). However, they became increasingly obsessed with their patent and patent infringement, and Curtiss was just one of many aviation innovators they sued. Another historian notes, "To them, almost everyone in aviation was a potential patent infringer. Their patent indeed was broad; it embraced every successful system of flight control. Anyone who wanted to use such a system was welcome to do so, provided that he purchased a license from the Wrights and paid the pertinent fees and royalties" (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 322). The litigation between the Wrights and Curtiss continued several years and resulted in several decisions and appeals.

The history of the litigation is long and somewhat convoluted. In 1910, the Wrights first filed their accusations with the court, and a judge issued an injunction against Curtiss. Curtiss posted a bond of $10,000, and the injunction was removed, but the patent infringement case still stood. However, Curtiss could continue to build airplanes while the suit made its' way through the courts (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 313). In February 1913, the judge vindicated the Wrights, "Holding that their patent indeed was broad enough to apply to Curtiss's ailerons, Hazel handed down a permanent injunction barring Curtiss from building, selling, or publicly flying his airplanes" (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 324). Curtiss appealed, and the judge stayed the injunction, so Curtiss continued to build his planes (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 324). After eleven months, the appellate court upheld the prior decision, but Curtiss saw an ambiguity in the ruling. Historian Heppenheimer continues, "The injunction only covered aircraft that moved their ailerons simultaneously in opposite directions. He introduced a system that moved only one aileron at a time, leaving the other flush with its wing. The Wrights had thought of this; it was in Claim 1 of their patent" (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 324). However, Claim 1 was not part of the litigation, which meant that the remaining Wright brother, Orville (Wilber died in 1912), had to file a brand new suit, which he did in 1914 (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 324). This second suit dragged on until 1917, when it became obsolete because of World War I. The U.S. government ordered a massive number of airplanes to fight the war, and patent holders all pooled their resources to help the government. By this time, Curtiss had numerous patents of his own, and he never instigated a patent lawsuit, believing the technology and shared information was far more important than patent infringement (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 330). His flying boats were being used by England before America entered the war, and to get around the lawsuit, Curtiss built his planes in the U.S., but built the ailerons in Canada, shipping the planes there to have the ailerons installed, because Canada did not recognize American lawsuits (Heppenheimer, 2003, p. 329).