Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Enabling IP Securitization By Improving Cash Flow Predictability
As the paradigm of corporate value continues to shift from tools and machinery to ideas and innovation, there is an increasing drive to identify new and innovative ways to monetize that value. With more than two-thirds of the S&P 500 market capitalization coming from intangible assets, traditional monetization methods such as the sale, licensing, donation, and enforcement of intellectual property rights are evolving as innovative intellectual property managers and investment professionals look for ways to leverage some of that value. One such approach is the securitization of the royalty streams associated with intellectual property assets.
Generally speaking, securitization is the process of aggregating the rights to future payments that are owed (such as a stream of royalties) and selling those rights as a negotiable security. While any asset with a cash flow can be securitized, the most important characteristic of that cash flow to consider is its predictability. Most recognized for the securitization of home mortgage loans by organizations like Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the practice of securitization is also regularly applied to tangible asset classes that exhibit predictable cash flows such as consumer loans and asset-backed commercial paper.
When considering intellectual property for securitization, in most instances the greatest challenge is dealing with a cash flow that is difficult to predict with a high degree of certainty. Unlike a home mortgage where a borrower's personal financial and credit histories can be used to measure the probability that he will make his future monthly mortgage payments, there are no established guidelines or criteria that can be applied to intellectual properties to determine whether or not they will continue to generate royalties over time. The absence of such guidelines or criteria requires that careful consideration be given to the characteristics and complexities that are unique to each intellectual property asset being considered for securitization.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?