Property, intangible

a blog about ownership of intellectual property rights and its licensing


assignment

  • Uh-oh Moment

    Terra Sul Corp. a/k/a Churrascaria Boi Na Brasa v. Boi Na Braza, Inc. is one of those “uh oh” cases. It’s a fairly routine examination of a petitioner’s first use date to determine who is senior user of the mark. The “uh oh” is a theory that the mark, when transferred from the sole proprietor… Continue reading

  • “Filed,” Not “Executed”

    It pays to read the statute sometimes. If the statute says “the applicant shall file in the Patent and Trademark Office . . . ,” having the former applicant file it isn’t going to work. The former applicant signed the document before it assigned the mark, but then filed the document after the assignment to… Continue reading

  • Cut Your Losses

    The Exclusive Rights blog reports on a case from the Supreme Court of Indiana, where one company hired another to design and host its web site. An often-told story; the hiring company stopped paying the bills and the designing company shut down the web site, then sued on the bill. In response, the defendant counterclaimed… Continue reading

  • Automatic Assignment or Agreement to Assign?

    Patent numbers 5,138,459, 6,094,219, 6,233,010 and 6,323,899 had three named inventors, Marc Roberts, Matthew Chikosky and Jerry Speasl. They invented the subject matter of the patents while working for Mirage Systems, Inc., then formed their own company, Personal Computer Cameras, Inc. St. Clair Intellectual Properties invested in the company, and when Personal Computer Cameras was… Continue reading

  • Well, It Was Probably Assigned

    The TTABlog reports on a case about the mark RUSSKAYA for vodka that addresses two different attacks on trademark ownership. One is a fairly standard charge of abandonment. The second is a standing attack, based on a claim that the intent to use trademark application was improperly assigned. Under Section 10(a)(1) of the Lanham Act,… Continue reading

  • The Unmentioned

    Here’s a patent assignment, in its entirety: I, JACK BENNETT, . . . do hereby sell and assign to VECTOR CORROSION TECHNOLOGIES LTD. . . . all my interest in the United States, Canada and in all other countries in and to my US, Canadian, and European applications for patents and issued U.S. patent, namely:… Continue reading

  • Caught in the Crossfire

    Patently-O revisits the half-millionth design patent, the design of the Chrysler Crossfire, and its assignment history. Now pledged to the government. © 2009 Pamela Chestek Continue reading

  • The SCO Group Wins One -Trademark, That Is

    The effects of the infamous SCO Group copyright lawsuits ripple on and on. I can’t begin to summarize the complexities of the cases, but if you’re interested you can spend a few years perusing this site. In a sentence, The SCO Group claimed to be the owner of the copyright in one prong of the… Continue reading

  • Jumping to Conclusions

    One thing lawyers are good at is exploiting weaknesses. A recently-filed case in Delaware used an incorrect admission in an unrelated case as grounds for a motion to dismiss, claiming that the admission demonstrated that the plaintiff was not the actual owner of the patent. The defendant’s motion was ultimately unsuccessful, but a lot time… Continue reading

  • University versus Professor

    There have been a few news reports of a suit between the University of Missouri and Galen J. Suppes, a professor of chemical engineering, and William R. Sutterlin, a former graduate teaching assistant and post-doctoral fellow. The university has a broad contractual claim to ownership of patents for inventions created by its employees, including those… Continue reading