Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Fishing for Joint Patent Ownership Under 'BASF v. CSIRO'
A recent Federal Circuit opinion sheds light on the process for settling patent co-ownership disputes pursuant to an underlying agreement. Although the precedential opinion does not change the rules of contract interpretation, it suggests considerations when drafting ownership agreements.
BASF Plant Science, LP v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Case Nos. 2020-1415, -1416, -1919, -1920 (Fed. Cir. March 15, 2022), arose from a two-year joint research and development project that began in 2008. Both parties were pursuing genetically modified plants that would produce a high quantity of Omega-3 fatty acids. These plants were to be primarily used as a nutritional supplement for farm-raised fish, enabling their Omega-3 fatty acid content to be similar to fish caught in the wild.
The plants' development required years of experimentation with a variety of desirable genes and existing plants. At one point, BASF and CSIRO determined that it would be worthwhile to combine their efforts under a two-year Materials Transfer and Evaluation Agreement (MTEA). The agreement allowed the companies to combine proprietary genes in their experiments, but the experiments ultimately did not produce a marketable outcome. In 2010, the parties went their separate ways, and both parties later brought separate products to market. In 2016, BASF discussed licensing CSIRO's related patent portfolio, but those talks were unsuccessful.
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.
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.
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?
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.