AE 35

[unbeldi]

Does anyone here have a No. 3 Monophone ?   Does it have this same stamp ?


In several cases it seems AE used labels or stamps that excluded patents that might have been already granted.
All the Type 35A5 sets that have stamps appear to use this same stamp.  I have not recorded another one.
I think for the 34A3, they only ever used a single stamp as well.  Later in the 1940s, when they started using the golden decals, they updated them constantly; there were probably at least 50 varieties of those, I have recorded perhaps half of them.

[Ktownphoneco]

Jack   ....     I've found in the past that patent description and patent claims are usually written as separate entities, as are the drawings, and all 3 are created as their own individual "PDF" documents.   I have no idea why they do that, and in this particular case, the "PDF" covering the description is followed by the "PDF" comprised of the drawings, which is then followed by the claims "PDF".
I put them together as one "PDF" document, in the order in which they appeared on the Canadian Patent web site, but moved the drawings "PDF" to the the end the single "PDF" document I created.
I just re-assembled everything, and the description is now first, followed by the claims portion of the patent, with the drawings at the end.       I think the last line on page 6 of the description, is pointing to the numbered paragraphs under the claim part of the patent that follows, as "1", "2", etc., etc.
I think the programmers the government hired were told to follow a specific format when scanning and entering hard copy patent documents into a computer system, but I think in a lot of cases, whoever wrote the actual patent application back in 1938, did so under the criteria required at the time, and certainly had no idea that someday, their written application would be uploaded to a computer to be viewed by the world.

The revision is attached.    See if this makes more sense.

Jeff


         

[Jack Ryan]

Does anyone here have a No. 3 Monophone ?   Does it have this same stamp ?

Yes but not that new. The stamp is from the mid 1930s so there is a decade's worth of AE 3s before that.

For that matter, the earliest AE 34s and 35s wouldn't have used that stamp either.

Is it a stamp? I thought it was a transfer - shows how much attention I take.

Jack

[unbeldi]

Yes but not that new. The stamp is from the mid 1930s so there is a decade's worth of AE 3s before that.

For that matter, the earliest AE 34s and 35s wouldn't have used that stamp either.

Is it a stamp? I thought it was a transfer - shows how much attention I take.

Jack

Do you have any other examples of patent labels or stamps used on "early" 34s or 35s?
This label/stamp covers patents from 1927 to 1929, including the design patent of the 3, so it may very well have been used for most of the lifetime of the No. 3.  Perhaps not using that AE logo, as the early labels for the 34A3 didn't show a logo either.

If this label were originally intended only for the 35, it leaves one wondering why it didn't include the patent for the induction coil, which is included in the list for the 34, and which presumably preceded the 35. Instead this label includes the AST patent of 1928, which is not referenced anymore on the 34, after the induction coil patent had been granted.

Was there another process to "transfer" vermilion ink other than a stamp ?
Perhaps one shouldn't call it an "ink".

[Jack Ryan]

I only meant that that label was mid 1930s on because of the AE logo. I can't remember seeing a similar label with a previous logo and I can't check at the moment.

Similar labels have appeared on curved surfaces where it might be difficult to use an ink stamp. In the context, clearly I did not mean the verb transfer. I meant a transfer or water transfer or water slide.

Jack

[unbeldi]

I only meant that that label was mid 1930s on because of the AE logo. I can't remember seeing a similar label with a previous logo and I can't check at the moment.

Similar labels have appeared on curved surfaces where it might be difficult to use an ink stamp. In the context, clearly I did not mean the verb transfer. I meant a transfer or water transfer or water slide.

Jack

Some paper labels simply did not have the company logo, but I have not seen one for a 35, IIRC.
The water transfers appear to have been used after 1943, but probably not until after the war.

The stamps on the 35s were always applied on the even side surface inside the housings. On the 50s they first used paper labels on the top curved surface, I don't recall any stamps there, none that I have recorded.

[Ktownphoneco]

Jack   ....  First :  Sorry, I meant to mention this in a previous post.     Yes, the Canadian Patent Office does have an Industrial Design Patent system, but it only goes back so far.     I don't think the agency recorded anything prior to the 1930's.

Second:  I found the design patent for the type 35.    I was entering what I assumed were the correct search parameters, which, as it turns out, were wrong.  Mr. Herbert OBERGFELL, assigned the design patent to Northern Electric, of Montreal, QC., Canada.   The address indicated on several lines in the issued design patent documents is a little confusing, in that Northern's address is also listed as 617 Clinton Place, River Forest, Illinois.      That address appears to be Obergfell's home address at the time, and a check on Google Earth confirms that it is a residential neighborhood.
It's curious to note that a number of patents created by Mr. Obergfell, for telephones and related equipment, which were quite obviously Automatic Electric sets, were assigned to Northern Electric.

Canadian Design Patent No. 10693  (Attached)
Date of Registration :  March 28th, 1935.
                        Title :  Wall Telephone.

Jeff

[Jack Ryan]

Some paper labels simply did not have the company logo, but I have not seen one for a 35, IIRC.
The water transfers appear to have been used after 1943, but probably not until after the war.

The stamps on the 35s were always applied on the even side surface inside the housings. On the 50s they first used paper labels on the top curved surface, I don't recall any stamps there, none that I have recorded.

Thanks for that. I don't have an AE 35 and not enough AE 50s to see a pattern. None of those and very few AE telephone models after 1920 were used here.

Regards
Jack

[unbeldi]

Thanks for that. I don't have an AE 35 and not enough AE 50s to see a pattern. None of those and very few AE telephone models after 1920 were used here.

Regards
Jack

With 'patterns' it is kind of sparse for AE anyways, it seems.  Many or most 50s didn't have a label or transfer decal at all, or they have been wiped in the meantime, because the water decals on the top are invariably in bad shape, cracked, or partly pealed off. Perhaps that was due to the curvature. So perhaps they were just polished off in refurbishment.
The red vermilion stamp seems to be somewhat more consistent on the inside of 35s.  But they couldn't apply anything there anymore for the 50s, because they added the sound grill.

[Jack Ryan]

Jack   ....  First :  Sorry, I meant to mention this in a previous post.     Yes, the Canadian Patent Office does have an Industrial Design Patent system, but it only goes back so far.     I don't think the agency recorded anything prior to the 1930's.

I wonder what was used in its place - copyright? There must have been something to discourage competitors from making an identical looking item.

Second:  I found the design patent for the type 35.    I was entering what I assumed were the correct search parameters, which, as it turns out, were wrong.  Mr. Herbert OBERGFELL, assigned the design patent to Northern Electric, of Montreal, QC., Canada.   The address indicated on several lines in the issued design patent documents is a little confusing, in that Northern's address is also listed as 617 Clinton Place, River Forest, Illinois.      That address appears to be Obergfell's home address at the time, and a check on Google Earth confirms that it is a residential neighborhood.
It's curious to note that a number of patents created by Mr. Obergfell, for telephones and related equipment, which were quite obviously Automatic Electric sets, were assigned to Northern Electric.

Canadian Design Patent No. 10693  (Attached)
Date of Registration :  March 28th, 1935.
                        Title :  Wall Telephone.

Jeff

Interesting. I think you know more about NE patents than I do but:

1. Was Obergfell able to assign his patent to whomever he pleased? Perhaps AE in the US and NE in Canada.

2. Who represented AE in Canada then? There was originally an agreement between AE and NE - perhaps it still existed in some form.

Something for a rainy day.

Regards
Jack

[Jack Ryan]

With 'patterns' it is kind of sparse for AE anyways, it seems.  Many or most 50s didn't have a label or transfer decal at all, or they have been wiped in the meantime, because the water decals on the top are invariably in bad shape, cracked, or partly pealed off. Perhaps that was due to the curvature. So perhaps they were just polished off in refurbishment.
The red vermilion stamp seems to be somewhat more consistent on the inside of 35s.  But they couldn't apply anything there anymore for the 50s, because they added the sound grill.

Yes I had noticed that where I have more evidence to look at. Instead of making a stamp and then looking for somewhere to stamp it, it might have been better to make a stamp to fit the space available.

Jack

[unbeldi]

I have seen this pattern before, in which an AE telephone, with a US patent even, was later registered in Canada for Northern Electric Co.
There must have been some kind of agreement.

[Jack Ryan]

I have seen this pattern before, in which an AE telephone, with a US patent even, was later registered in Canada for Northern Electric Co.
There must have been some kind of agreement.

Yes, Jeff and I have seen that too. What must have been irritating for AE is that if NE made an improvement to an AE patent (ie, the design), they assigned it to Western Electric.

Jack

[Ktownphoneco]

Jack / Karl   ....    Yes, and we've seen that before with at least one of the "N" series dials.      Of course any theory will be hard to authenticate, but it occurred to me that there's ample proof that A.E. obviously dealt with Northern from time to time, dials being one, but also C.O. switches, PBX equipment, and one specific desk stand (N20-UN) come to mind, and I'm wondering if it had something to do with placing patents in a sort of "trust" situation with Northern for future favors and / or considerations.      A.E. didn't have much of a physical presence in Canada until the later years, when they contracted Phillips Cable in Brockville, Ontario to make their equipment, which was then followed by the opening of an actual Automatic Electric plant in that same city.   As we've discussed before, and as you (Jack) just reiterated, Northern made a design change to an A.E. patented dial design, and assigned Western Electric to be the "keeper of the patent".     If Mr. Obergfell was, in a manner of speaking, changes sides every couple of years, I'm sure it would've stirred up enough animosity between himself and the two companies, that he would have been told to take a hike.    But he seems to have floated back and forth between Northern and A.E. for a good number of years, so that seems to indicate there must have been some sort of agreement in place between all concerned parties.
Bell (Canada) and Northern were appointed Bell System Companies by AT&T, and if there was any irregularities going on, I'm sure their position within that system would have been terminated, but that didn't happen.
That's my own hypothesis at this point, but other than that, I can't come up with any other rational explanation as to why that situation occurred, and kept on occurring for several years.

Jeff

[unbeldi]

I don't think it had anything to do specifically with Obergfell.