You’ve all seen this language before. This is from an agreement to transfer rights to a formula for nutritional products in exchange for royalties: If you can’t read the image, it says In consideration of the sum of $1.00 payable by Synergy to HealthBanc upon execution of this Agreement, HealthBanc hereby transfers and assigns...
Read more →Licenses and releases for after-acquired affiliates can be tricky things to draft. Are after-acquired affiliates also licensed to the rights? Are they licensed on a forward-going basis only, or does the license or release cure earlier infringement? It all depends on how you write it. On November 24, 2016, plaintiff Oyster Optics, LLC sued...
Read more →The Copyright Act of 1976 made a fundamental change to copyright law by making copyright divisible. Authors can give someone else exclusive rights in a portion of their copyright, for example the exclusive right of first publication, retaining no right of first publication for themselves. The drafters of the Copyright Act also contemplated that...
Read more →Apparently someone is still interested in the Amiga operating system. In 2009, non-party Amiga, Inc. and defendant Hyperion Entertainment C.V.B.A. entered into a settlement agreement that resolved a number of lawsuits between them. The plaintiff, Cloanto Corp., was a licensee of Amiga at the time of the settlement agreement and mentioned in the agreement...
Read more →We have a rare win under Copyright Act § 117(a), a section of the Copyright Act that allows someone to copy or adapt a computer program under very narrow circumstances. Invocation of the section has been largely unsuccessful because it only applies where one is the owner of a copy of the program. However,...
Read more →Something that license drafters need to think through is how a license grant works, as a permission, not a prohibition. If there is conduct that a licensor wants to prohibit, then it has to ensure that it addresses that need in the agreement. The licensor also needs to think through what remedies will be...
Read more →Sometimes a case sends you back to the basics. This was one of those cases for me. Copyright infringement claims against Dollar General appear to be the driving force behind a sequence of assignments of the copyrights for some toys. The relevant chain of title for the copyrights was Acquawood => Focus Brand Limited...
Read more →I asked who owns the RESTORADERM trademark? When I read the facts in the Third Circuit opinion I thought it was a no-brainer. But apparently I was wrong, because the district court came out one way and the appeals court the other. Sköld won in the trial court. Galderma moved for summary judgment on...
Read more →The opening sentence: “This case proves once again that people will fight for a catchy name.” My kind of case. Plaintiff Thomas Sköld coined the name “Restoraderm” for a proprietary skin care formulation. (When the court uses the word “coined,” you know it has grasped the difference between a word and a trademark.) In...
Read more →The government has been trying to seize the MONGOLS trademark for over ten years. You can read my previous posts about it here, here, here and here. The Mongol Nation, an unincorporated association, owned or owns several registrations for a trademark, service marks and collective membership marks for the word mark MONGOLS, the riding...
Read more →Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
© 2013 Pamela S. Chestek. All rights reserved.