Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Retroactive Licenses and Claim Settlements: The Law of Unintended Consequences
It is fairly typical for an owner of intellectual property who has convinced an infringer to cease and desist the infringing activity to offer a retroactive license covering the period of past infringement as part of the settlement agreement. Granting a retroactive license to the direct infringer can be dangerous, however. Not only will the license forgive the direct infringement; it also will erase any possible inducement or contribution claim the patentee has against a third party. Because the retroactive license is unnecessary in most cases, before granting it a patentee should be very certain it has no inducement or contribution claims against third parties.
Induced and Contributory Infringement Require Proof of Direct Infringement
Claims for inducement to infringe or contributory infringement must ultimately be based on underlying claims for direct infringement. Dynacore Holdings Corp. v. U.S. Philips Corp., 363 F.3d 1263, 1272 (Fed. Cir. 2004). To establish a claim for induced patent infringement, '271(b) of the Patent Act provides that the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant 'actively induce[d]' the infringement. 35 U.S.C. '271(b). Courts have held that defendants whose actions induced acts they knew or should have known would infringe the asserted patent are considered to have 'actively induced' the infringement and are thereby liable for induced infringement. See e.g., Manville Sales Corp. v. Paramount Sys., Inc., 917 F.2d 544, 553 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow!
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.