Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Anti-assignment clauses are typically inserted into license agreements to preclude the introduction of an unwanted third party into the parties' relationship, giving the licensor more control over its valuable property and with whom it ultimately does business. In certain instances, courts do not look favorably upon restraints to alienation of property, but in the intellectual property context, federal common law generally precludes the free assignability of intellectual property licenses without the permission of the licensor. Without such a policy, any license granted by a patent or copyright holder could potentially be assigned to the licensor's competitor or another party to whom the copyright or patent owner might be unwilling to license. In the context of software licenses, ordinarily a court will apply state law to contractual disputes, but federal law pre-empts state law concerning questions of copyright law or policy, which include the assignability of non-exclusive agreements.
An interesting question arises when a licensee's corporate status changes due to a merger, such that the assets of the former company automatically transfer to the new, surviving entity. How does a corporate merger and legal transfer of assets affect a license agreement's anti-assignment clause? Recently, the Sixth Circuit held that a software licensee's merger, which, by law, transferred its license rights to the surviving entity, violated the license's express anti-assignment clause, resulting in liability for copyright infringement.
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
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.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.