Summary
This post provides a detailed analysis of George B Selden's influential patent, which dominated the US automobile industry during its early years. It examines how Selden, leveraging his expertise as a patent attorney, obtained broad patent protection for a self-propelled vehicle and the subsequent exclusive licensing to Electric Vehicle Company. The post outlines the formation of the Association of Licensed Automobile Manufacturers (ALAM) and its legal battles with Henry Ford, culminating in the landmark appellate court decision that favoured Ford and ended Selden's claim. The narrative highlights the legal and industrial impact of Selden’s patent on the evolution of the American automobile sector.
The name most commonly associated with early automobile patents is Henry Ford, alongside figures such as Alexander Winton and Karl Benz. Ford’s first encounter with the US patent system, however, was not as an inventor but as an alleged infringer. Ford was accused of infringing US Patent No. 549,160, titled “Road Engine”, which had been granted to George B. Selden in 1895. That patent, comprising a three-page description, five drawings and six claims, exerted considerable control over the US automobile industry for a significant period.
Background: George B. Selden and the Brayton Engine
George B. Selden was a patent attorney from Rochester who sought to construct a lightweight, self-propelled, one-man-operable horseless carriage. Existing engines of the era were large and ill-suited to that purpose. During a visit to the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition in 1876, Selden encountered an internal combustion engine invented by Brayton, which had low power and weighed over half a tonne. Selden planned improvements to the Brayton engine and filed a patent application on May 8, 1879 under Application No. 549,160. The breadth of the claims, which provided alternatives to several features, suggests that Selden approached the application with the strategic acuity of a patent attorney seeking the widest possible scope of protection.
The Delayed Grant and Its Strategic Value
Using his professional knowledge of patent office procedure, Selden managed to delay the grant of his patent by approximately 16.5 years from the filing date. Under the rules then in force, a patent remained in force for 17 years from grant, and applicants were permitted up to two years to respond to official actions from the patent office — a period considerably longer than the three or six months (with extensions) available under modern practice. Selden is reported to have taken approximately 726 days simply to submit a new oath to the Patent Office, thereby extending the pendency of the application while automobile technology developed around him.
The Electric Vehicle Company and ALAM
Upon becoming aware of Selden’s patent, the Electric Vehicle Company (EVC), headquartered in Connecticut, approached Selden and obtained an exclusive licence. The agreed terms required EVC to pay $15 per vehicle manufactured, or a minimum of $5,000 per year. Following the acquisition of the licence, EVC commenced a programme of infringement notices and litigation against car manufacturers across the United States. Major manufacturers including Winton, Cadillac, Packard and Olds Motor eventually took licences from EVC. The licensees and EVC then formed the Association of Licensed Automobile Manufacturers (ALAM), which assumed responsibility for deciding which new manufacturers would be permitted to take licences.
Ford’s Refusal and the Litigation
When Henry Ford applied for a licence through ALAM, the association rejected the application on the ground that the Ford Motor Company was an assembler rather than a manufacturer. ALAM subsequently sued Ford for patent infringement and placed advertisements in trade publications threatening to bring proceedings against purchasers of unlicensed vehicles. Ford responded with his own advertising campaign, undertaking to protect purchasers against any prosecution for alleged infringement and asserting that Selden’s patent was anticipated by prior art.
The Federal Appellate Court Decision
In 1911, the Federal Appellate Court decided in favour of Ford, effectively ending Selden’s claim to a patent covering all motor vehicles. The outcome is documented in detail in Monopoly on Wheels, a work by William Greenleaf, a professor at New Hampshire University, which provides a thorough account of the patent battle and its significance for the development of the automobile industry and for Henry Ford’s career.
Disclaimer: This article is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified attorney before acting on any matter discussed here.