• Posts Tagged ‘exclusive licensee’

    Due Diligence Matters

    by  • September 27, 2010 • trademark

    Pacific Coast Trailers, LLC v. Cozad Trailer Sales, LLC is a tale of failed due diligence. Reliance Trailer Manufacturing Corp. (“Reliance Mfg.”) owned the trademarks RELIANCE, STURDYWELD, ALLOY and COMET. It assigned the latter three, but not RELIANCE, to a sibling company, Reliance Trailer Co., LLC (“Reliance LLC”). Reliance LLC defaulted on some loans...

    Read more →

    What is SALBA and Who Owns It?

    by  • May 2, 2010 • trademark

    For me, Ralston v. Salba Corp. was one of those “whoops, keep an eye out for that next time” kind of cases. Note to self – in the future, check for a reversionary right in the property being licensed. Plaintiffs William and Richard Ralston and Great Western Tortilla Co., a company that had been...

    Read more →

    Making Your Bed

    by  • November 18, 2009 • trademark

    The 7th Circuit decision in Sunstar, Inc. v. Alberto-Culver Co. is interesting in two ways: it provides some insight into how one company is managing the Japanese market, and also provides a little education on Japanese trademark licensing law. Alberto-Culver, owner of the VO5 family of marks, wasn’t having any success in the Japanese...

    Read more →

    The Coinco Strategy

    by  • November 13, 2009 • patent

    Mars, Inc. v. Coin Acceptors, Inc., first blogged here, demonstrated what can go wrong with ownership of patents within a corporate enterprise. As a refresher, in Mars the defendant, “Coinco,” successfully attacked the chain of title of the patents in suit. Mars had transferred ownership of the patents between family members during the lawsuit,...

    Read more →

    A Registrant, Its Assigns – and Exclusive Licensee

    by  • September 26, 2009 • trademark

    Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114, provides a cause of action for a “registrant” of a trademark. Section 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127, defines a “registrant” as including “legal representatives, predecessors, successors and assigns.” So one only has a cause of action under Section 32 if one is the registrant...

    Read more →

    The NFL is One Entity – For Trademark Licensing, Anyway

    by  • August 23, 2008 • trademark

    An appropriate decision for football season; the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has affirmed, in an antitrust case, that the exclusive licensing of all professional football teams marks to one vendor is not a violation of the Sherman Act. NFL Properties is an unincorporated organization of 32 separately owned teams. Each team...

    Read more →