Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Shop right, in United States patent law, is an implied license under which a firm may use a patented invention, invented by an employee who was working within the scope of their employment, using the firms' equipment, or inventing at the firms' expense.
the patented invention is not available to the public at a reasonably affordable price, or, the patented invention is not worked [25] in the territory of India. In March 2012, India granted its first compulsory license ever to Indian generic drug manufacturer Natco Pharma for Sorafenib tosylate, a cancer drug patented by Bayer. [26]
A corporate income tax may include royalties from copyrights in its calculation of overall income even though direct income from copyrights, a federal institution, is immune from state taxation. Buck v. Jewell-LaSalle Realty Co. 283 U.S. 191: 1931: 9–0: Substantive: Public performance right in radio broadcasts in business establishments ...
Assign rights to a subject invention only to an organization having as a primary function the management of inventions, unless approved by the Federal agency; Share royalties with the inventor; Use the balance of royalties after expenses for scientific research or education; Make efforts to attract, and give preference to, small business licensees.
Reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) terms, also known as fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, denote a voluntary licensing commitment that standards organizations often request from the owner of an intellectual property right (usually a patent) that is, or may become, essential to practice a technical standard. [1]
Offensive patent aggregation – purchasing of patents in order to assert them against companies that would use the inventions protected by such patents (operating companies) and to grant licenses to these operating companies in return for licensing fees or royalties. Open patent – patented invention that can freely be distributed under a ...
The mere fact that royalties were still being paid, the Court ruled, was not sufficient to remove the courts' jurisdiction under Article III. 28 USC 2201 Declaratory judgment jurisdiction is available to patent licensees who continue to pay royalty and have not breached the licensing agreement. KSR v. Teleflex: 550 U.S. 398: 2007
The term "cross licensing" implies that neither party pays monetary royalties to the other party, although this may be the case. For example, Microsoft and JVC entered into a cross license agreement in January 2008. [3] Each party, therefore, is able to practice the inventions covered by the patents included in the agreement. [4]