Informationen zu Hartford-Empire Comp.: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Version vom 18. Mai 2022, 14:26 Uhr

The Story Siehe auch Emhard.
The early years Emhart Glass began with a dream shared by three US entrepreneurs, Karl E. Peiler, William H. Honiss and William A. Lorenz, who aimed to find new ways of making and using glass containers. Later, four more businessmen joined them to form the Hartford-Fairmont Company. Hartford-Fairmont developed the innovative technique of feeding molten glass into moulds in gobs, rather than by suction. Ultimately, their work led to the automation of the glass container industry.
1902
The story begins with an idea shared by US entrepreneurs Karl E. Peiler, William Honiss and William A. Lorenz: to find new ways of making and using glass containers.
1912
Four more businessmen join to form the Hartford-Fairmont Company, which develops the first glass gob shearing and feeding device, the forerunner of modern glass container machines.
1913
Hartford-Fairmont introduces the first plunger feeder, laying the foundations for the automation of the glass industry.

The Birth of IS Hartford-Fairmont joined with the Empire Machine Company of Elmira, NY, USA, to form Hartford-Empire. Glass-making pioneer Henry W. Ingle joined the company and created the first individual section (IS) machine. IS represented a new standard in automation, and established the core of Emhart Glass’ product range right up until the present day. When the first four IS machines went into operation at the Carr-Lowery Glass Company in Baltimore, the era of automatic container manufacturing had begun.

Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386 (1945), was a patent-antitrust case that the Government brought against a cartel in the glass container industry.[1] The cartel, among other things, divided the fields of manufacture of glass containers, first, into blown glass (allocated to Corning Glass Works) and pressed glass, which was subdivided into: products made under the suction process (allocated to Owens-Illinois Glass Co.), milk bottles (allocated to Thatcher Mfg. Co.), and fruit jars (allocated to Ball Bros. plus a fixed production quota for Owens-Illinois, and Hazel-Atlas Co.). The trial court found the cartel violative of the antitrust laws and the Supreme Court agreed that the market division and related conduct were illegal. The trial court required royalty-free licensing of present patents and reasonable royalty licensing of future patents. A divided Supreme Court reversed the requirement for royalty-free licensing as "confiscatory," but sustained the requirement for reasonable royalty licensing of the patents.
Quelle: www.en.wikipedia.org