Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Case on 'Coolcore' Marks Settles a 34 Year Debate Regarding Bankruptcy and IP Law
On May 20, 2019 the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, No. 17-1657, ruling that a trademark licensee can retain its rights under a trademark license agreement that is rejected by the licensor as an executory contract in bankruptcy.
In a decision that was unanimous on the merits (the decision was 8-1 with the sole dissent based on a non-substantive issue), the Supreme Court settled a decades-long debate regarding the fate of licenses in bankruptcy. Specifically, the Court determined that, under Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor's rejection of an executory contract pursuant to bankruptcy has the same effect as a breach outside bankruptcy, such that a debtor-licensor's rejection of a license agreement does not revoke the underlying trademark license.
The decision resolves a split of authority between the Fourth and Seventh Circuits regarding whether or not a debtor's rejection of an agreement granting a trademark license terminates the non-debtor licensee's right to use the licensed marks. Prior to the Supreme Court's decision, the Fourth Circuit had taken the position that such a rejection does in fact terminate the underlying trademark license, whereas the Seventh Circuit had taken the position that such a rejection should be treated as a breach of the contract by the debtor-licensor that (like breach outside bankruptcy) would not extinguish the licensee's rights to continue to use the licensed marks.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
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.
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.
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.
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?