LICENSING UPDATE 2021 - GREGORY J. BATTERSBY CHARLES W. GRIMES - Bass, Berry & Sims PLC
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
2021 LICENSING UPDATE GREGORY J. BATTERSBY CHARLES W. GRIMES
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher and the author(s) are not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. If legal advice or other professional assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. —From a Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations. Copyright © 2021 CCH Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or utilized by any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher. For information about permissions or to request permissions online, visit us at www.WoltersKluwerLR.com/policies/permissions-reprints-and-licensing, or email us at LRUSpermissions @wolterskluwer.com. Published by Wolters Kluwer in New York. Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory U.S. serves customers worldwide with CCH, Aspen Publishers and Kluwer Law International products. Printed in the United States of America ISBN 978-1-5438-3703-2 ISSN 1538-876X 1234567890
About Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory U.S. Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory U.S. delivers expert content and solutions in the areas of law, corporate compliance, health compliance, reimbursement, and legal educa- tion. Its practical solutions help customers successfully navigate the demands of a changing environment to drive their daily activities, enhance decision quality and inspire confident outcomes. Serving customers worldwide, its legal and regulatory portfolio includes products under the Aspen Publishers, CCH Incorporated, Kluwer Law International, ftwilliam.com and MediRegs names. They are regarded as exceptional and trusted resources for general legal and practice-specific knowledge, compliance and risk management, dynamic workflow solutions, and expert commentary.
WOLTERS KLUWER SUPPLEMENT NOTICE This product is updated on a periodic basis with supplements and/or new editions to reflect important changes in the subject matter. If you would like information about enrolling this product in the update service, or wish to receive updates billed separately with a 30-day examination review, please contact our Customer Service Department at 1-800-234-1660 or email us at: customer.service@wolterskluwer.com. You can also contact us at: Wolters Kluwer Distribution Center 7201 McKinney Circle Frederick, MD 21704 Important Contact Information To order any title, go to www.WoltersKluwerLR.com or call 1-800-638-8437. To reinstate your manual update service, call 1-800-638-8437. To contact Customer Service, e-mail customer.service@wolterskluwer .com, call 1-800-234-1660, fax 1-800-901-9075, or mail correspondence to: Order Department—Wolters Kluwer, PO Box 990, Frederick, MD 21705. To review your account history or pay an invoice online, visit www.WoltersKluwerLR.com/payinvoices.
ABOUT THE EDITORS Gregory J. Battersby holds an A.B. (bio-chemistry) from Seton Hall University and a J.D. from Fordham University School of Law. He is a member of the New York and Connecticut Bars and is admitted to practice as a patent attorney before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. He is managing member of The Battersby Law Group, LLC, 25 Poplar Plain Road, Westport, CT 06880 (203) 454-9646, which specializes in intellectual property and licens- ing law with a particular emphasis on merchandising law and toy licensing. Mr. Battersby has been a guest lecturer at the Franklin Pierce Law School, University of Connecticut Law School and Quinnipiac Law School and serves as General Counsel for the International Licensing Industry Merchandiser’s Association (LIMA). He has been a Vice President and member of the Board of Directors of The New York Intellectual Property Law Association. Charles W. Grimes holds a B.S. (engineering mechanics) from Pennsylvania State University and a J.D. from the University of Denver School of Law. He is a member of the Illinois, New York, Connecticut, and Florida Bars and is admitted to practice as a patent attorney before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. He is managing partner of Grimes, LLC, 3501 Bonita Bay Blvd., Bonita Springs, FL 34134, 239-330-9000, which specializes in intellectual property law with a particular emphasis on trademarks, licensing and litigation. Mr. Grimes is an Adjunct Professor at Ava Maria Law School and has served on the Editorial Board of The Trademark Reporter. The two have written and lectured on a variety of intellectual property issues. They have authored The Law of Merchandise and Character Licensing, Licensing Law Handbook, Multimedia and Technology Licensing Agreements: Forms and Commentary, Drafting Internet Agreements, License Agreements: Forms and Checklists, Licensing Desk Book, Licensing Royalty Rates, Licensing Update, A Primer on Technology Licensing, Patent Disputes: Litigation Forms and Analysis, The Toy & Game Inventor’s Guide, and Trademark Disputes: Litigation Forms and Analysis. They serve as Executive Editors of the Licensing Journal and the IP Litigator. They are recognized as the leading experts on the subject of merchandising law. xi
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Robert Ambrose (@rambrose) is the Director of Strategy and Business Development at FADEL, a global provider of enterprise-class intellectual prop- erty rights and royalty management software. He works with media, entertain- ment, publishing, and high-tech companies to transform their approach to exploiting content, brands, and intellectual property (IP). Previously, Mr. Ambrose worked as a broadcast journalist, media technology consultant, and industry analyst. Rebecca Ash is the Editorial Director at Total Licensing Ltd., which publishes several renowned titles, including Total Licensing Magazine, a worldwide magazine for the licensing industry read by over 80,000 individuals in 104 countries, Total Art Licensing, Total Licensing Australia, and Total Licensing UK. The company has also recently launched a new publication, Total Brand Licensing. As Editor, Becky is responsible for content, editorial decisions, business growth ideas and innovation, design, traveling and participating in global trade events, and sourcing new business. Griffin M. Barnett is an Associate with Winterfeldt IP Group. Griffin’s practice focuses on trademark and Internet matters, particularly digital enforcement issues such as domain name disputes (including UDRP complaints and similar administrative proceedings to recover or disable infringing domain names) and ICANN-related issues, including the new gTLD program. Griffin currently chairs the International Trademark Association’s Subcommittee on the Rights Protection Mechanism Review and is an active member of ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency. Christie Bates is an associate in the McMillan’s Intellectual Property and Technology Group in Toronto. She is developing a broad practice in intellectual property litigation, as well as in trademark, copyright, and patent law. Bryan Bergman is a partner with Los Angeles based firm, Nolan Heimann, LLP. He mainly provides legal services to businesses operating in the cannabis industry. His client services include providing assistance in entity strategy and formation; contract negotiations and drafting on a wide variety of deals including real estate, investment, management, distribution/sales, and other business trans- actional issues; cannabis license application preparation; regulatory compliance; and organizational structuring and management. In addition to his legal work, Bryan maintains a substantial network of cannabis professionals from a variety of areas available to assist his clients in all aspects of establishing or expanding their businesses, such as legal, financial/accounting, labor, political consulting/ lobbying, real estate, banking, business development, media, social media, and brand marketing. xiii
2021 LICENSING UPDATE Martin Brochstein is Senior VP of Industry Relations and Information at Licensing International in New York City. www.licensinginternational.org Sheldon Burshtein is a partner with Blakes, Cassels & Graydon LLP based in Toronto. He has been certified by The Law Society of Upper Canada as a spe- cialist in IP law, particularly in the areas of patent, trademark, and copyright practice. He is also a registered patent and trademark agent in Canada. Mr. Burshtein’s practice includes the clearance, prosecution, acquisition, enforce- ment, and exploitation of patents, trademarks, copyright, industrial designs, and other forms of IP. A significant portion of his practice is devoted to counseling on IP, technology, electronic commerce, and social media. His primary focus is licensing and other transactions involving technology, including life sciences and information technology, and other IP rights, including in the sports and enter- tainment industries. Mr. Burshtein regularly advises on IP matters affecting every industry sector and represents clients in all technology sectors. David L. Cohen provides IP monetization services through his law firm, David L. Cohen, P.C., and his consultancy, Kidon IP. His hands-on experience includes strategic litigation planning; global project management; patent moneti- zation; FRAND licensing; building and managing legal and IP teams; patent licensing and negotiations; global anti-trust; strategic IP portfolio development and acquisition; IP strategy and opinion work; patent and trade secret assessments and management; and IT needs, strategy, & design. Prior to launching his law firm David. L. Cohen, P.C., and his consultancy, Kidon IP, in 2017, David was the Chief Legal and IP Officer of Vringo, Inc. where he created a world class in-house team that spearheaded an effective global monetization program and brought in over 40MUSD in licensing revenue while pioneering numerous cut- ting edge, global monetization, enforcement, and structured innovation techni- ques. Prior to Vringo, David was senior in-house counsel at Nokia Corporation, where he participated in or managed projects that generated over 1BUSD in rev- enue. David worked at the law firms of Lerner David and Skadden Arps before joining Nokia and clerked for Chief Judge Carman of the Court of International Trade. David has a BA in the history of science (with departmental honors) and an MA in History from the Johns Hopkins University, an M. Phil in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University, and an MA in Legal and Political Theory (with distinction) from University College London. His received his juris doctorate from Northwestern University School of Law in 1998, cum laude, where he was on law review. David has multiple publications to his credit, is a co-inventor on two patents, and is a frequent speaker at confer- ences. David was listed in IAM 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists in 2015, 2016, and 2020. Kimberly Culp is a litigator in the IP, Advertising and Marketing, and Trademarks and Brand Protection Practice Groups at Venable, LLP. She has suc- cessfully represented and counseled clients in state and federal courts in high stakes complex commercial, trademark, patent and false advertising, trade secrets, and class action defense matters. xiv
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Adrian Cyhan is a partner in the San Diego office of Dinsmore & Shohl LLP. He is a registered patent attorney with a practice focused on licensing and technology transactions, and providing strategic counsel with respect to identify- ing, protecting, and leveraging intellectual property assets. Rodney DeBoos is a consultant with the Australian Intellectual Property law firm, Davies Collison Cave Law in Melbourne. He has had extensive experi- ence in all types of IP matters and is a Certified Licensing Professional and a for- mer president of the Licensing Executives Society Inc. Eric Fanchiang is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Irvine, CA office and a member of the firm’s antitrust and commercial litigation groups. His prac- tice focuses on both defense-side and plaintiff-side antitrust litigation in a variety of markets including technology and transportation. James G. Gatto is a partner at Sheppard Mullin in the firm’s Intellectual Property Practice Group. He serves as leader of the firm’s Blockchain & Digital Assets and Open Source industry teams. Jim leverages his unique combination of nearly 30 years of IP experience, business insights and attention to technology trends to help companies develop IP and other legal strategies that are aligned with their business objectives. His practice focuses on all aspects of intellectual property, internet and technology law, including patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, and open source. Jim advises clients of all sizes (startups to Fortune 100 companies) on key legal and business issues relating to the use of social media, video games, social games and online gambling (gamblification), virtual goods and currency, social networks, virtual worlds, mirror worlds, augmented reality, open source user-generated content, location-based services, and gamifi- cation. He regularly advises internet and social media companies on business and legal strategies relating to virtual goods and virtual currency, developing IP protection and monetization strategies, handling terms of service and end user license agreements, development, licensing and partnership agreements, develop- ing DMCA policies, handling DMCA enforcement, privacy and COPPA policies and much more. Peter Giddens is a Partner in the Toronto office of McMillan and Co-Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. Peter counsel’s clients concerning the acquisition, clearance, management, protection, enforcement and licensing of intellectual property, with a particular emphasis on trademark, copyright, and domain name issues. Laura Adriana Grinschgl LL.M. (QMUL) specializes in IP and Tech Law matters at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP in Vienna (Austria). Roman Golovatsky is a Legal Director with DLA Piper in St. Petersburg, Russia and specializes in civil law, intellectual property law, antimonopoly law and advises Russian and international companies on a wide range of issues. Roman possesses extensive litigation and arbitration practice on traditional busi- ness disputes. Roman is registered as a patent attorney in the Russian Federation and is a recognized expert in the development and practical implementation of comprehensive defense measures for intellectual property owners and of the xv
2021 LICENSING UPDATE means of individualization in Russia and the CIS, including measures to combat illegal import of goods containing intellectual property. Jennifer P. Gore, Winterfeldt IP Group’s Internet Policy Specialist, leads the firm’s policy and advocacy efforts on behalf of brand owners. Jennifer has been working in the domain industry for over two decades, and previously held senior leadership roles with major Internet registries and registrars, as well as with ICANN. She is an active member of ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency. Brad Hanna is a partner at McMillan LLP who Co-Chairs the firm’s Franchise and Distribution Group as well as the International Arbitration Group. His practice consists of complex corporate commercial litigation with a particular focus on franchise and distributorship disputes. He represents Canadian and inter- national franchisors before all levels of courts in Canada. As a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, he also has expertise in alternative dispute res- olution techniques and routinely acts as counsel in mediations and both domestic and international commercial arbitrations. Jessica Hannah is an associate at Finnegan. She focuses on trademark liti- gation and prosecution, client counseling, false advertising, and portfolio man- agement related to a broad range of industries, including consumer goods, food and beverage, media, and sports and fitness. She assists with counseling clients on the selection, registration, maintenance, portfolio management, and enforce- ment of trademarks in the United States and abroad. Jessica is involved in cases before the federal trial courts and the TTAB. B. Brett Heavner is a partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP whose practice includes all aspects of trademark and unfair compe- tition law, with particular emphasis on trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false advertising litigation, and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) liti- gation. His clients include pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufac- turers, banking and financial services institutions, major trade associations, food product companies, and petroleum exploration and refining companies. Mark Hess is the Vice President of Client Relationship Management at IMC Licensing. John F. Hornick is an IP counselor and litigator based in Finnegan’s Washington D.C. headquarters. Based on his 30+ years of experience, he coun- sels clients on virtually every aspect of IP law, from licensing to litigation. He has litigated close to 100 IP cases in more than 30 U.S. federal courts in 18 states, five U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Interna- tional Trade Commission (ITC), and others. He has appeared before more than 100 judges, arbitrators, and mediators and has tried every type of IP case. He has successfully avoided litigation for clients in hundreds of other disputes. His passion is the IP issues of 3D printing/additive manufacturing. Mr. Hornick started the firm’s 3D printing initiative and founded Finnegan’s 3D Printing Working Group. Mr. Hornick advises and educates clients about 3D printing and the IP issues of this rapidly developing and potentially disruptive technology, xvi
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS and how it may affect their businesses, both offensively and defensively. Mr. Hornick closely follows the industry, frequently speaks and writes on 3D printing and its potential effects on IP law and the world, and has been recog- nized as a thought leader in this space. His articles have been published at www.3DPrintingIndustry.com, in the Journal of 3D Printing & Additive Manufacturing, for which he serves on the Editorial Board, and in Wired Innova- tion, and he writes a column for 3D Printing World, published in English and Chinese. He was the only IP attorney selected by the National Academies to par- ticipate in the U.S. Comptroller General Forum on Additive Manufacturing (which will be the basis of a report to the U.S. Congress), and was invited by the National Association of Attorneys General to participate in its 3D printing initiative. Mr. Hornick also serves on the Advisory Board of Advanced Manufacturing Insight and as a juror for the International Additive Manufactur- ing Award. Matthew Hunt is an associate with Bristows LLP in the Competition & EU department and is currently involved in a number of on-going FRAND disputes, both for SEP holders and implementers. Christine G. Ing is Co-Practice Group Leader of the Blakes Law Firm’s Information Technology group. Her practice focuses on commercial transactions involving information technology and IP. Chrissie Jamieson is VP Marketing at MarkMonitor, UK. She has over 15 years of experience in the business intelligence, brand protection and domain sector and has worked to develop the MarkMonitor brand internationally. Through her career, Chrissie has been responsible for the Marketing leadership and market development of major technology businesses such as Information Builders. Chrissie holds a degree in Marketing and Business Administration from Hertfordshire University and a Post Graduate in Strategic Management from Hertfordshire Business School. Anne S. Jordan has 30+ years’ experience advising large- and medium- sized corporations, both as a senior executive with responsibility for the corpora- tions’ legal affairs and as outside counsel. She is currently Of Counsel to the Chicago law firm Mandell Menkes, advising high-tech and consumer products companies on commercial transactions and IP strategy and enforcement matters. She also serves as a mediator and arbitrator on American Arbitration Associa- tion’s and Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution’s commercial panels. Prior to joining Mandell Menkes, Ms. Jordan served as the Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of PeopleSoft, Inc., the world’s second largest provider of enterprise application software with annual revenues of approxi- mately $2.8 billion. Before that, she was the Vice President and General Counsel for Sega of America, Inc., a partner in the Palo Alto firm Carr & Ferrell, and Assistant General Counsel for Dole Foods, Inc., a $2 billion food processing and real estate development corporation. Paul C. Jorgensen is the founder and principal of The Jorgensen Law Firm in Washington D.C. Mr. Jorgensen’s over 20 years of legal experience includes xvii
2021 LICENSING UPDATE acting as a senior IP and contract counsel at the Washington D.C. law firm Patton Boggs LLP. Prior to his years with Patton Boggs, he was a Senior Intellectual Property Counsel with Choice Hotels International, Inc., where he managed a large worldwide portfolio of trademarks, copyrights, domain names and trade secrets, and where he designed and managed profitable licensing programs. Through this experience, he has successfully prosecuted many U.S. and interna- tional trademark, copyright, domain name applications, and has designed and negotiated hundreds of successful contracts and licenses. Holger A. Kastler is an IP/IT attorney at Hyazinth LLP in Berlin, Germany. His practice focuses on technology transactions and disputes, in and out of court. He represents companies in licensing negotiations in a variety of industries. Nicki Kennedy is a patent partner at Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP in Denver, CO. Samuel Kim is an associate at Ernst & Young in its Transaction Tax group. His work focuses on buy and sell side tax structuring and due diligence surround- ing mergers and acquisitions in the private equity and media and entertainment sectors. Samuel can be reached at samuel.kim2@ey.com. Lisa Kimmel is Senior Counsel at Crowell & Moring, LLP in Washington, D.C. Ms. Kimmel has nearly twenty years of experience as an antitrust lawyer and holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of California at Berkeley. A former senior advisor at the Federal Trade Commission, her practice focuses on clients in the information and communications technology and digital com- merce sectors, including issues at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law. Justin Krieger is the Managing Partner of the Denver office of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP. Mr. Krieger’s practice focuses on client counseling, district court and patent office litigation, and patent prosecution. He has a partic- ularly successful track record handling inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Ellen Lambrix is a senior associate in the Commercial IP/IT Team at Bris- tows LLP. Ellen has a broad IP experience and specializes in advising clients on non-contentious IP matters with a focus on transactions which involve the devel- opment, exploitation, and transfer of IP rights. Ellen advises clients across a range of industries and has a particular interest in the life sciences sector. More information about Ellen is available at Bristows.com. Oliver Laing is a UK solicitors and partner in the firm of Potter Clarkson LLP. Oliver specializes in the negotiation of technology licensing and collabora- tion agreements and also handles infringement litigation. Janna Lawrence is an associate in the Commercial IP/IT Team at Bristows LLP. She qualified as a solicitor in August 2020 and has a background in life sciences and journalism. More information about Janna is available at Bristows.com. xviii
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Ryan Martin focuses his practice at Loeb & Loeb LLP in Chicago on trademark, marketing, promotions, advertising, copyright, privacy, and other intellectual property matters. He assists consumer brands and advertising agency clients in the drafting and negotiation of sponsorship agreements, branded enter- tainment and media deals, celebrity talent and influencer agreements, and the licensing of music, trademarks, and other intellectual property. Ryan graduated cum laude from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and cum laude from the University of Michigan Law School (J.D.). Alistair Maughan is Co-Managing Partner of Morrison & Foerster’s Lon- don office. He is co-chair of the Technology Transactions Group and a member of the Global Sourcing Group. Mr. Maughan focuses on commercial contracts and technology-based projects for major companies and public sector organiza- tions at https://www.mofo.com/people/alistair-maughan.html. Patricia Ann Metzer is a Commissioner of the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board. She is the author of numerous texts and articles on taxation, including the taxation of IP. Miss Metzer has served as an Associate Tax Legislative Coun- sel with the U.S. Treasury Department, vice chair-publications of the Tax Section of the American Bar Association, and a member of the Advisory Com- mittee of the NYU Annual Institute on Federal Taxation. Paige Mills is a member at Bass, Berry & Sims in Nashville, Tennessee. As a seasoned trial lawyer with more than 25 years of litigation experience, she con- centrates her practice in complex litigation and intellectual property and technol- ogy. Paige routinely represents clients all over the country in copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, entertainment, advertising, privacy, internet and technol- ogy disputes. In 2019, Paige was accepted as a mediator for the World Intellec- tual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center, an international organization that resolves various types of intellectual property dis- putes. She can be reached at pmills@bassberry.com. Akkad Moussa is an associate at Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP in Washington, D.C. Amy Mudge is an experienced attorney and partner in the Regulatory and Advertising and Marketing Practice Groups at Venable. She represents clients before the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Department of Justice (DOJ), state attorneys general, and the National Advertising Division. Ms. Mudge is the co-editor of the blog allaboutadvertisinglaw.com (www.allaboutadvertisinglaw.com). Erik Müürsepp is an associate in the Commercial IP/IT Team at Bristows LLP. With a background in life sciences, he advises a range of clients in innova- tive industries on the effective commercialization of intellectual property and technology assets. More information about Erik is available at Bristows.com. Yasamin Parsafar is an associate at Sheppard Mullin in the firm’s Intellec- tual Property Practice Group. She serves as a lead associate of the firm’s Block- chain & Digital Assets industry team. Yasamin’s practice focuses on protecting her clients’ intellectual property rights through counseling, prosecution, enforce- ment and litigation. xix
2021 LICENSING UPDATE Mark Patrick is an associate at Sheppard Mullin in the firm’s Intellectual Property Practice Group. He serves as a lead associate of the firm’s Esports & Games industry team. Kathleen T. Petrich is a partner with Miller Nash, based in the firm’s Seattle office. Ms. Petrich practices in the area of IP, including mechanical/ electrical, electromechanical, design patent, and trademark prosecution. She counsels clients regarding their IP rights and strategizes with clients as to the protection and enforcement of those rights. She also litigates IP disputes, and pro- vides clearing, registration, prosecution, opposition practice, portfolio manage- ment, opinion, due diligence, license, and settlement negotiations services. In addition, Ms. Petrich works in the green technology sector, with a special interest in clean transportation. Dr. Lutz Riede LL.M. (UBC), LL.M. (IT-Law) specializes in IP and Tech Law matters at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP in Vienna (Austria). David Schnider is a partner with the Los Angeles based firm, Nolan Heimann LLP. His practice focuses primarily on intellectual property, branding, and licensing. David manages a portfolio of over 500 domestic and international trademark registrations for his clients. He has been representing cannabis compa- nies since 2015, helping them navigate the unique business and regulatory requirements that impact their brand strategy. David also spent six years in house where he helped build a multi-million-dollar licensed apparel division from scratch and developed an understanding of how to adapt legal strategy to practical business needs. Randy Shaheen is a partner in the Regulatory and Advertising and Market- ing Practice Groups at Venable LLP. He represents clients before numerous reg- ulatory agencies including the FTC, state attorneys general, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the National Advertising Division. Mr. Shaheen is the co-editor of the blog allaboutadvertisinglaw.com (www. allaboutadvertisinglaw.com). Wolfgang Schönig is a partner of Morrison & Foerster (International) LLP based in the firm’s German office in Berlin. His practice specialty is advising on IP aspects relative to transactions in the digital, telecoms, high tech, life sciences, and pharmaceuticals industry, as well as legal representation in IP disputes. Mark Seavy joined Licensing International in 2014 as Publications Editor, responsible for the trade association’s daily Newslinks online publication. Prior to that, he was senior editor at Consumer Electronics Daily and its predecessor, Tele- vision Digest, for 21 years, and a news editor at the Associated Press in Connecticut. Bruce B. Siegal is a member of Taylor English’s Intellectual Property and Entertainment, Sports and Media Departments, where he focuses on sports brand protection and enforcement, trademark licensing, contract negotiation, marketing, and business operations. Formerly the SVP and General Counsel of the Collegiate Licensing Company/IMG College, Siegal has vast experience in trademark enforcement actions and anti-counterfeiting efforts. Contact him via email, bsiegal@taylorenglish.com. xx
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Christopher Smith is a shareholder in the Metro-Detroit office of Brooks Kushman P.C. He has over 14 years of patent litigation, licensing, and opinion experience. Chris advises clients on various licensing transactions, on both the licensor and licensee side of the negotiation. He has also represented corporations across a broad range of industries and technologies in various IP litigation dis- putes, including lawsuits involving patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and copy- rights, as well as post-grant proceedings at the PTAB. Mark Snelgrove is a UK solicitor and partner in the firm of Potter Clarkson LLP. Mark specializes in the negotiation of technology licensing and collabora- tion agreements. Christiana State is a legal executive with over 20 years of experience in the areas of technology and commercial transactions, product counseling, intel- lectual property, privacy and global litigation management. Christiana holds elec- trical engineering and law degrees from Santa Clara University. Christiana is also a certified CIPP privacy professional and registered to practice before the US Pat- ent and Trademark Office. Christiana’s experience includes advising start-up companies, as well as public corporations, in a variety of technology-related cor- porate matters and activities, including strategic partnerships, intellectual prop- erty management, open source, standards, corporate reorganizations, global patent licensing, including FRAND licensing, M&A diligence and marketing. Christiana is a frequent speaker at various conferences on intellectual property, litigation and privacy topics and has been a guest lecturer at Santa Clara Univer- sity and University of San Francisco. Christiana has also served on the board of directors of various non-profit entities. Robert Strand is a renowned expert in helping brands strategically acceler- ate growth. A creative brand strategist and concept activator, he brings 26 years of brand extension, strategic partnership development, intellectual property rights management, licensing, marketing, product & content development, and buying experience to client engagements. He has achieved success in both entrepreneur- ial and established corporate environments. At The Blake Project, he serves as Chief Brand Extension & Licensing Strategist and assists clients with strategic brand partnership strategy and serves as an expert witness as a brand and licens- ing subject matter expert. Prior to joining The Blake Project, Robert served Vice President, Licensing & Sponsorship at CONSOR Intellectual Asset Management where he assisted clients with brand monetization strategy, valuation, and licens- ing services. Key initiatives included valuing the licensing programs of two world famous and deceased celebrities, patent monetization, and co-presenting educational seminars at prestigious New York City law firms as part of the Licensing Executives Society Continuing Licensing Education program. Pat Treacy is a Partner with Bristows LLP in London and works with cli- ents on transactions and complex agreements (including settlement, R&D, licens- ing and joint venture agreements) in all sectors, with a focus on high tech and pharma/life sciences. xxi
2021 LICENSING UPDATE Gia M. Velasquez focuses her practice at Loeb & Loeb LLP in Chicago on transactional matters related to intellectual property, information technology, advertising, and media. She graduated summa cum laude from Yale College (B.S. Chemistry) and cum laude from Harvard Law School (J.D.). While in law school, Gia received the Weiler Scholar Award for Excellence in Sports Law and was the recipient of Dean’s Scholar Prizes for Music and Digital Media and Sports and the Law: The Three Major Leagues. David Wanetick is the Managing Director at IncreMental Advantage, a world renowned IP valuation firm. Mr. Wanetick is a thought leader in valuing emerging technologies and intangible assets such as patents, trademarks, copy- rights, customer lists, and contracts. His clients include leading technology trans- fer offices, solo inventors, Fortune 100 companies, mid-sized companies, law firms, incubators, venture capital, and private equity firms. His valuations are con- ducted for licensing, capital raising, tax reporting, and litigation support purposes. He developed the widely acclaimed Total Valuation Extraction methodol- ogy for assessing the value of emerging technologies as well as the Patent Valu- ation Gauntlet for determining the value of patents. He has written several books on investing and his articles have been published in virtually all of the intellectual property, accounting, IP law, and valuation publications in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. He lectures on the Valuation of Emerging Technologies all over the United States as well as in Canada, the United King- dom, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and Israel. Tyson Winarski is a patent law professor with the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University and the University of San Francisco School of Law and teaches a course on Patent Licensing and Monetization. Tyson also serves on the Board of Directors for the Grand Canyon Conservancy, the official non-profit partner of the Grand Canyon National Park. For nearly 8 years, Tyson also served as a Senior Licensing Attorney for Intellectual Ventures devel- oping and executing patent monetization programs through assertion-based licensing strategies and negotiating licensing agreements. Tyson also worked for seven years with Steptoe and Johnson LLP and Pillsbury Winthrop in Washington, D.C. where Tyson’s patent practice included patent litigation in Federal District Court and the International Trade Commission under Section 337, opinions on validity and infringement, all phases of patent preparation and pros- ecution, portfolio due diligence for mergers and acquisitions as well as IPO S-1 statements, patent reexamination proceedings, and copyright and trademark liti- gation and licensing. In addition, Tyson has testified as an expert witness on licensing in Federal District Court and has served as a court appointed arbitrator. Tyson is also the inventor of 33 patents, 11 of which have been purchased by var- ious companies including Google. Tyson’s inventions include blockchain tech- nologies, nanotechnologies, graphene coated optic fibers and lasers, anti- terrorist laser devices, and renewable energies. Tyson is widely published on IP matters with IAM-Intellectual Asset Management Magazine, IEEE Magazine, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), and Wolters xxii
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Kluwer publishers. Tyson has also been a frequent lecturer on patent matters at AIPLA, Practicing Law Institute, IEEE Conferences, European Nano Systems NSTI, the San Francisco Intellectual Property Law Association, and the Arizona Bar Association. A graduate of the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Ari- zona State University, Tyson is a registered patent attorney holding a BSME and MSEE. Tyson can be reached at tywinarski@gmail.com. Brian J. Winterfeldt, the Founder and Principal of Winterfeldt IP Group, has been practicing trademark law for nearly two decades. His expertise encom- passes both traditional trademark portfolio matters and brand-related digital issues, as well as ICANN issues and other Internet policy matters. Brian is cur- rently President of ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency, a member of the USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee, a panelist with the World Intellectual Property Organization for the UDRP, and a member of the Interna- tional Trademark Association’s Anti-Counterfeiting Committee. Mark Wittow is a partner at K&L Gates LLP, where he leads the firm’s intellectual property/technology transactions and data protection practice group. His work focuses on complex intellectual property and technology transactions of all types, as well as electronic commerce and content licensing issues and data privacy and data protection compliance. Mark can be reached at mark.wit- tow@klgates.com and further information about him is at http://www.klgates. com/mark-h-wittow/. Nancy E. Wolff is a member of the intellectual property, media and enter- tainment law firm of Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard, LLP located in New York, New York and Beverly Hills, CA. She represents a wide range of cre- ative individuals and companies in all areas of digital media, art law, licensing and publishing and serves as counsel to the Digital Media Licensing Association. She is part of the firms Litigation Practice and supports the firms Entertainment practice with pre-publication and fair use review of films. Ms. Wolff frequently speaks on copyright, digital media, and licensing issues. Chelsea Wong is a Solicitor at Baldwins Intellectual Property. She is a New Zealand barrister and solicitor specializing in intellectual property advice and dis- pute resolution. Chelsea has experience across a range of industries, including having worked in the public sector advising on copyright policy, and several years as a project manager in music education and outreach for one of New Zeal- and’s largest arts organizations. Chelsea is a violinist and musicologist, with a music degree and law (honors) degree from the University of Auckland, New Zealand. She has a particular interest in music copyright and issues that affect the creative sector. Yinfei Wu is an associate at Finnegan and has significant experience in both United States and China trademark and copyright law. She advises clients and works closely with counsel around the world on trademark usage, clearance, prosecution, domestic and worldwide portfolio management, litigation, and enforcement matters. Ms. Wu also handles cancellation and opposition proceed- ings before the TTAB. xxiii
CHAPTER 3 COPYRIGHT LICENSING Paige Mills § 3.01 Copyright Protection [A] Introduction [B] Copyright Licensing [C] International Treaties and Directives § 3.02 Year in Review [A] New Legislation [1] CASE Act of 2020 [2] PLSA [B] Who Can Sue? [C] Who Is Subject to Suit? [D] What Is Copyrightable Subject Matter? [1] Facts and Historical Events Are in the Public Domain and thus Are Not Copyrightable [2] States Cannot Claim a Copyright in Their Laws [E] What Constitutes Infringement? [1] Proving Substantial Similarity [2] Defenses [F] Musical Works [1] ISPs Can Have Liability for Illegal Downloads [G] Social Media [1] Use of Instagram’s Embed Tool May Be Infringement Without an Explicit License [H] Art Works [1] VARA Can Provide Substantial Liability for Destroying Art 3-1
COPYRIGHT LICENSING § 3.01[A] § 3.01 COPYRIGHT PROTECTION [A] Introduction The basics of copyright law are well-established but bear repeating. As a quick summary, copyright is a form of protection provided by the U.S. Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. §§ 501 et seq.) to authors of “original works of authorship” that are fixed in a tangible form of expression. An original work of authorship is a work that is independently created by a human author and possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity, the bar for which is low. A work is “fixed” when it is captured (either by or under the authority of an author) in a sufficiently perma- nent medium such that the work can be perceived, reproduced, or communicated for more than a short time. Copyrighted works may include literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, sound recordings, films, or typographical creations. Copyright protection in the United States exists automatically from the moment the original work of authorship is fixed; registration is not required. A copyright vests in its owner a “bundle” of rights, including the exclusive right to do the following: • Reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. • Prepare derivative works based upon the work. • Distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership or by rental, lease, or lending. • Perform the work publicly if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, or cho- reographic work; a pantomime; or a motion picture or other audiovisual work. • Display the work publicly if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, or cho- reographic work; a pantomime; or a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work. This right also applies to the individual images of a motion pic- ture or other audiovisual work. • Perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission if the work is a sound recording. The breach of these exclusive rights by one other than the copyright owner is copyright infringement, unless a defense applies, such as fair use, license, or the material is in the public domain. As mentioned above, registration is not required to have a copyright interest. However, registration does convey certain important benefits in protecting the copyright, such as the ability to sue in federal court and, if the copyright was registered at the time of the infringement, the abil- ity to seek statutory damages for the infringement. 3-3
§ 3.01[B] 2021 LICENSING UPDATE Copyright does not protect: • Ideas, procedures, methods, systems, processes, concepts, principles, or discoveries. • Works that are not fixed in a tangible form (such as a choreographic work that has not been notated or recorded or an improvisational speech that has not been written down). • Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans. • Familiar symbols or designs. • Mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring. • Mere listings of ingredients or contents. Consequently, another important defense to a claim of copyright infringe- ment is that the subject matter of the claimed copyright is not copyrightable. [B] Copyright Licensing A copyright owner can allow another to exercise one or more of the exclu- sive rights in its bundle of rights. Such permission is a license, and it can be exclusive or non-exclusive. If exclusive, it must be in writing. Generally, a copyright owner who grants a nonexclusive license to use copyrighted material waives the right to sue for copyright infringement if the license is breached. The only remedy is a suit for breach of contract. If, however, a license is limited in scope and the licensee acts outside the scope of the license, the licensor can bring an action in copyright infringement. Courts generally will narrowly construe a license’s scope, making the breach of a license a chancy proposition, often resulting in claims of copyright infringement in addition to breach of contract. When a work being licensed is a joint work, any of the joint authors may license its use, so as long as the author accounts to the co-authors for any profits earned. However, where the copyrighted work is not a work of joint authorship, but rather a compendium or collection, all co-owners must join in to grant an exclu- sive license. Otherwise, a single co-owner can only grant a non-exclusive license. The copyright owner can, of course, enter into voluntary licenses. The Copyright Act also provides for involuntary or compulsory licenses under certain conditions. For example, once a musical work has been recorded and distributed to the public, any content creator is allowed to record and distribute the song as long as they pay the required mechanical royalty and meet copyright law require- ments. With a compulsory license, the copyright owner’s permission is not required. Compulsory licenses are commonly used by satellite television provi- ders, cable providers, webcasters, and music companies, allowing them to broadly distribute copyrighted content legally and efficiently. 3-4
COPYRIGHT LICENSING § 3.01[C] [C] International Treaties and Directives In the United States, original works of expression that are eligible for copyright protection are protected under the U.S. Copyright Act. There is no international copyright that protects the author or copyright owner. A copyright may be protected only by the copyright laws of individual nations. International copyright conventions and treaties have been developed to establish obligations for treaty member countries to adhere to, and implement in their national laws, thus providing more certainty and understanding about the levels of copyright protection in particular countries. For example, the United States is a signatory to the two leading multilateral copyright treaties: the Universal Copyright Convention and the Berne Convention. These treaties do not provide direct copyright protection, but instead provide that a qualifying foreign work will receive protection which is equal to or greater than the protection given to the signatory’s own works. The United States is a member of many treaties and conventions affecting copyright. The following are the primary treaties and conventions that govern the protection of works in other countries: • Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (the “Berne Convention”)—the leading international agreement that sets standards for protecting literary and artistic works. • The Buenos Aires Convention—a treaty signed by most North and South American countries which allows for protection of all creative works as long as they contain a notice informing that the creator claims a copyright in the work. • The Brussels Convention Relating to the Distribution of Program- Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite (“SAT”). • Geneva Phonograms Convention (the “Geneva Convention”) sets standards for protection of sound recordings against piracy. • The Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who are blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled (“VIP”) • Universal Copyright Convention (UCC)—an international agreement that sets standards for protecting literary and artistic works, largely superseded by Berne. • WIPO Performances and Phonographs Treaty (WPPT)—an international agreement setting standards for protection of sound recordings; and • World Trade Organization (WTP)—the World Trade Organization’s obligations regarding Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, incorporating and expanding on Berne and adding enforcement obligations. 3-5
§ 3.02 2021 LICENSING UPDATE In seeking copyright protection for a U.S. work in another country, it is important to determine the “points of attachment” under that country’s copyright system, i.e., the factors that connect an eligible work to be protected among treaty member countries. An author’s nationality or the place a work was first published are examples of points of attachment. Often protection depends on the facts existing at the time of first publication. The scope of protection available in that country will then turn on the substantive provisions available under that country’s law and practice. Despite these numerous treaties, be aware that some countries offer little or no copyright protection to foreign works. § 3.02 YEAR IN REVIEW 2020 was a turbulent year by anyone’s estimation—we weathered the first of two presidential impeachments, a global pandemic, one of the most conten- tious election cycles in modern history, and the arrival of the “murder hornets.” While the landscape of copyright law was quite calm in comparison, there are lots of important developments that the careful copyright practitioner needs to know. There was important new legislation passed as part of the COVID Relief Deal or the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021,” which created a small claims court for copyright disputes and criminal penalties for unlawful streaming. There were also significant decisions on subjects ranging from state immunity, copyright trolls, graffiti, and tattoos. [A] New Legislation [1] CASE Act of 2020 On December 21, 2020, Congress passed a long-anticipated second round of COVID relief legislation as part of the Bipartisan-Bicameral Omnibus COVID Relief Deal or the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.” This relief bill pro- vided a second round of stimulus to individuals, businesses, and hospitals in response to the economic distress caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pan- demic. Included in the $2.3 trillion spending and coronavirus pandemic relief package was the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act (or the “CASE Act of 2020”). The CASE Act had been pending as part of H.R. 133 and contains an alternative dispute resolution program that was first approved by the House of Representatives on October 22, 2019. The CASE Act establishes a Copyright Claims Board (the “Board”) as a small claims court staffed by three Copyright Claims Officers to handle disputes, unless the accused infringer timely opts out. The Board can decide infringement claims, declarations of non-infringement, misrepresentation, and related defenses and counterclaims. If the work was registered at the time of the infringement, the Board is also empowered to award limited injunctive relief (in the event that the 3-6
COPYRIGHT LICENSING § 3.02[A] parties agreed to cease certain activities in the underlying proceeding) and money damages of up to $15,000 per violation with a cap of $30,000 per proceeding, excluding attorneys’ fees and costs. Even if the work was not registered at the time of the infringement, the copyright owner can potentially obtain statutory damages for a violation, but in that situation the damages are limited to $7,500 per work infringed, with a total of $15,000 in any one proceeding. The Board does not have the authority to make a finding of willfulness when making an award of statutory damages, although it can award attorney fees and costs if it determines that a litigant has acted with “bad faith conduct.” A final determination from the Board precludes re-litigation before any other court or tribunal. Generally, the Board would be excluded from hearing claims/counterclaims decided by or pending before a court of competent jurisdic- tion, by or against a federal or state governmental entity, or against a person or entity residing outside the United States. A petitioner must have filed for and obtained (or been denied) a registration before it can bring a claim before the Board. Any claim must be brought within three years of the accrual of the claim. Filing the proceeding tolls the statute of limitations for the commencement of an action on the same claim in a U.S. district court during the period in which the proceeding is pending. A respondent must be properly served with a notice and claim. Once served, the respondent will have a 60-day period to “opt out” of the Board proceeding by providing written notice to the Board. If the respondent does not opt out within 60 days, the Board will make a final determination which will generally preclude re-litigating the issue before any court or tribunal. Although the Board’s determinations are not binding on Article III courts, courts cannot vacate or modify these determinations, except in rare cases of fraud, misconduct or lack of authority—much like the grounds necessary to set aside an arbitration award. Many have raised concerns that the CASE Act will make it easier for copyright trolls to exact settlements because it reduces the obstacles to filing a copyright infringement case and that the $30,000 damages limit is too high to truly constitute a “small claims” court. Moreover, a copyright owner appears to have the right to obtain a subpoena to identify internet subscribers, without being burdened by the requirement of stating a plausible claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), opening the door for invasive discovery for claims that might be deemed defective or frivolous by a federal judge. Further, the targets of trolls might be unsophisticated individuals or small business that fail to appreciate the significance of being sued at the Board and fail to timely address the proceedings, resulting in default judgements that will be difficult, if not impossible, to overturn. The CASE Act is not without safeguards to prevent abusive filings, how- ever, it provides that any party who pursues a claim or defense in bad faith more than once in a 12-month period may be barred from initiating a claim before the Board for 12 months and grants the Register of Copyrights authority to issue reg- ulations limiting the number of proceedings a claimant may initiate in any given 3-7
§ 3.02[B] 2021 LICENSING UPDATE year. Only time will tell if the Board will help provide fair and cost-effective redress for copyright infringement or if it will simply give another tool for trolls to extort unreasonable settlements. [2] PLSA In addition, the CASE Act also contains the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act (“PLSA”). This legislation increases penalties for illegal streaming of copyrighted works. Currently a misdemeanor, the PLSA makes illegally streaming of copy- righted material a felony punishable by up to 10 years of imprisonment. This law was passed without much debate or scrutiny. Although the law primarily targets those who are illegally streaming for commercial gain, there is some concern that it could be used against the Average Joe who might lend his or her Netflix login to friends or family. It will be interesting to see how these provisions are interpreted by content providers and law enforcement in efforts to combat illegal streaming. [B] Who Can Sue? As set forth above, there has been a great deal of concern about the rise in copyright litigation brought by the so-called “copyright troll.” As quoted in Wisser v. Vox Media, Inc., No. 19 Civ. 1445, 2020 WL 1547381, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 1, 2020) (citations omitted), A copyright troll is a plaintiff who is “more focused on the business of litigation than on selling a product or service or licensing their copyrights to third parties. A copyright troll plays a numbers game in which it targets hundreds or thousands of defendants seeking quick settlements priced just low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay the troll rather than defend the claim.” And while everyone might love to hate the copyright troll, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit made it clear that one’s business model or the prurient nature of the copyright work is not to be considered when deciding whether a litigant has the right to early discovery or the ability to sur- vive a motion to dismiss. See Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Subscriber Assigned IP Address 73.180.154.14, 964 F.3d 1203 (D.C. Cir. 2020). In Strike 3 Holdings, the D.C. Circuit found that the district court abused its discretion by relying heavily on the copyright owner’s litigation history and the nature of its films rather than the relevant legal standards under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Strike 31 is a producer and online distributor of adult films, an industry that constantly battles online piracy. To protect against this 1 Strike 3 is one of the most prolific copyright trolls around, having filed more than 2,000 copy- right infringement cases in 2018 alone. See https://torrentfreak.com/us-online-piracy-lawsuits-hit-a- 3-8
You can also read