Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Trademarks serve as symbols of good will and are a valuable asset of the business associated with the mark. Not surprisingly, trademark licenses typically require the licensor's consent for assignments, because licensors want the right to pass on the abilities of new potential licensees. In the event of bankruptcy filing by the licensee, the contractual restriction on assignment is ordinarily unenforceable. See 11 U.S.C. ' 365(f)(1). Bankruptcy Code ' 365(c)(1), however, provides an exception to this general rule: a debtor may not 'assume or assign' any executory contract without consent of the non-debtor if 'applicable law' provides that the non-debtor can refuse to accept performance from a third party.
The district court in Blanks v. N.C.P. Marketing Group, Inc. (In re N.C.P. Marketing Group, Inc.), 2005 WL 3253268 (D. Nev. Nov. 21, 2005) held that a trademark license is 'personal and non-assignable' under applicable trademark law, and cannot be assumed or assigned by the Chapter 11 debtor licensee without the licensor's consent. Affirming the bankruptcy court, the district court said that it was ruling on a matter of 'first impression' in the bankruptcy context. The ruling is consistent, however, with non-bankruptcy trademark law. See, eg, Miller v. Glenn Miller Prods., 318 F. Supp. 2d 923, 938 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (held, non-exclusive trademark licensee cannot sublicense without consent of original licensor); Tap Publ'n, Inc. v. Chinese Yellow Pages (New York) Inc., 925 F. Supp. 212, 218 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (held, exclusive trademark license was personal to licensee and not assignable without licensor's consent). We review here fundamental principles of trademark law to show why trademark licenses are non-assignable (and, in some circuits, non-assumable) by licensees absent licensor consent.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.