Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Fifth Circuit Supports Perpetual License as Remedy for Video-Game Dispute
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld a perpetual license an arbitrator awarded a video-game publisher in a game's intellectual property rights ' as a remedy for the publisher's contract dispute with the game developer. Timegate Studios Inc. v. Southpeak Interactive LLC, 12-20256. Video-game developer Timegate and publisher Gamecock Media Group (now owned by Southpeak Interactive) entered into a contract to develop the futuristic game Section 8. The parties subsequently entered arbitration on Timegate's claims that Southpeak wasn't properly paying over profits. But the arbitrator instead awarded Southpeak a perpetual license in Section 8's intellectual property rights, on the ground that Timegate had breached the video-game agreement by failing to meet its promises and that the developer fraudulently induced Gamecock to enter into the contract. The Fifth Circuit noted: 'Timegate committed an extraordinary breach of the Agreement [e.g., by failing to use any of its own promised $2.5 million on the game] and an equally extraordinary realignment of the parties' original rights is necessary to preserve the essence of the Agreement. Because the Agreement bestowed broad remedial powers upon the arbitrator and because it was fraudulently induced and irreversibly violated by Timegate, the perpetual license is a rational and permissible attempt to compensate Gamecock and maintain the Agreement's essence.'
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.
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.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.