Talk:Marconi Company

Untitled
hey... i have been trying to find out anything relating to teh mysterious deaths of marconi scientists working on defence contracts from the 60s up to the ealry nineties. if any one has any info or helpful and factual acvcounts let me know

I saw a BBC 2 documamtary called "Scandals" just half an hour ago, stating that 25 Marconi employees died under strange circumstances. There's a website with a conspiracy theory, but I'm not sure if you can trust it: http://www.totse.com/en/conspiracy/institutional_analysis/sdi-art1.html

sssshh! unless you want to die prematurely in a nasty and undignifying manner.

Merger with Wireless Telegraph Trading Signal Company page

 * Support--A Y Arktos\talk 10:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The "Wireless Telegraph Trading Signal Company" page should be completely deleted, as there was never actually was a company called that. The original London company, founded July 20, 1897, was named the Wireless Telegraph and Signal Company, Limited. On March, 1900, this was changed to Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company, Limited. (Source, page 515 of the 1913 edition of "The Year Book of Wireless Telegraphy and Telephony".Thomas H. White 10:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I went ahead and did the merge. Both names are frequently given as the name of the original company ( for example), so I think it would be most helpful to users to leave the "telegraph trading signal" entry, redirecting to here.Lisamh 22:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The Marconi Company brought this suit in the Court of Claims pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 68, 35 U.S.C.A. 68, to recover damages for infringement of four United States patents. Two, No. 763,772, and reissue No. 11,913, were issued to Marconi, a third, No. 609,154, to Lodge, and a fourth, No. 803,684, to Fleming. The court held that the Marconi reissue patent was not infringed. It held also that the claims in suit, other than Claim 16, of the Marconi patent No. 763,772, are invalid; and that Claim 16 of the patent is valid and was infringed. It gave judgment for petitioner on this claim in the sum of $42,984.93 with interest. It held that the Lodge patent was valid and infringed, and that the Fleming patent was not infringed and was rendered void by an improper disclaimer. The case comes here on certiorari, 317 U.S. 620, 63 S.Ct. 263, 87 L.Ed. --; 28 U.S.C. 288- [320 U.S. 1, 4]  (b), 28 U.S.C.A. 288(b), on petition of the Marconi Company in No. 369, to review the judgment of the Court of Claims holding invalid the claims in suit, other than Claim 16, of the Marconi patent, and holding the Fleming patent invalid and not infringed, and on petition of the Government in No. 373, to review the decision allowing recovery for infringement of Claim 16 of the Marconi patent. No review was sought by either party of so much of the court's judgment as sustained the Lodge patent and held the first Marconi reissue patent not infringed. http://www.radiomarconi.com/marconi/popov/sentenza.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.9.57.75 (talk) 11:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)