News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Royalties

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

The Pitch - April 2022

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP on

The Pitch newsletter is a monthly update of legal issues and news affecting or related to the music, film and television, fine arts, media, professional athletics, eSports, and gaming industries. The Pitch features a diverse...more

Weintraub Tobin

“Happy Together” – The Ninth Circuit Plays The Golden Oldies Of Copyright Law

Weintraub Tobin on

Calling it a “ball of confusion,” the Ninth Circuit recently considered a case involving the music of the Turtles, SiriusXM Satellite Radio, and whether royalties are owed under California copyright law for music dating prior...more

Lewitt Hackman

FRANCHISOR 101: Supreme Tax Implications

Lewitt Hackman on

On June 21 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed prior case law and let states tax online retailers that do not have physical presence in the state. The ruling also has significant implications for franchise systems that sell...more

Lewitt Hackman

Why Yesterday's SCOTUS Decision May Impact Franchisor Royalties

Lewitt Hackman on

Yesterday, in South Dakota vs. WayFair, Inc., et al., the United States Supreme Court (“Court”) overturned long-standing precedents that required an out-of-state Seller to have a physical presence in a state to collect...more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Raging Bull” and the Patent Act: Laches Still Available in Patent Cases - SCA Hygiene Products AB et al. v. First Quality Baby...

McDermott Will & Emery on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit convened an en banc panel to examine the Supreme Court’s “Raging Bull” decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. in the context of deciding whether laches remains a...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Entertainment and Media Litigation Update - October 2015

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

The "Dancing Baby" Case—Ninth Circuit Rules That "Fair Use" Must First Be Considered Before Sending Takedown Notices Under the DMCA - Why it matters: On September 14, 2015, the Ninth Circuit ruled in Lenz v. Universal...more

K&L Gates LLP

Important Changes in Litigating Oil and Gas Cases in Federal Court: What the 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules Mean for Oil and...

K&L Gates LLP on

Many oil and gas disputes are litigated in federal court. In recent years, federal litigation has undergone significant changes in discovery practices and rules. For example, with the increase in electronically stored...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - August 2015 #4

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

SUPREME COURT CASES - The Supreme Court Upholds Prohibition on Charging Royalties After Patent Expiration - In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC, 576 U.S. ---- (2015), the Supreme Court declined to overrule its 1964...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Check Your Technology License: Payments May Be Unenforceable

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Expiration of a patent also terminates the rights to collect royalties on that patent – even if a license contract says otherwise. All businesses are reminded to check the termination date of any patent licensed to the...more

Foley Hoag LLP

How Not to Get Snared in Brulotte’s Web

Foley Hoag LLP on

The Supreme Court’s Kimble Decision Reminds Licensors and Licensees to Evaluate Post-Expiration Royalties with Care - On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court, in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, declined to overrule–on...more

Weintraub Tobin

Everything Old is New Again: Post-Expiration Patent Royalties are a Bad Idea!

Weintraub Tobin on

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court upheld the longstanding case law that prohibits a patent owner from receiving royalties after a patent has expired. In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (June 22, 2015) 2015 U.S....more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

The Finite Life of a Patent Upheld: No Royalties After Expiration

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6 to 3 ruling citing stare decisis, upheld the half-century rule against royalty payments accruing after expiration of a patent. The Court’s decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC is a...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Rebuffing Critics, Supreme Court Re-Affirms Ban on Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Brulotte has been widely criticized as economically...more

Mintz

Supreme Court Upholds Brulotte Rule Prohibiting Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

Mintz on

On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, upholding the rule, first announced in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U. S. 29 (1964), that an agreement allowing a patent owner to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The 'Super Powered' Rule of Stare Decisis Defeats Spider Man

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Supreme Court of the United States, in a 6-3 decision, left undisturbed the rule from its 51-year-old decision in Brulotte v. Thys Co. (1964), invoking stare decisis and rejecting arguments seeking to overturn the rule...more

Knobbe Martens

U.S. Supreme Court Confirms That Post Patent Expiration Royalties Are Prohibited

Knobbe Martens on

Background of the Case - The dispute in Stephen Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 13-720, ___ U.S. ___ (2015), arose out of a 2001 settlement of a prior lawsuit between the parties. The prior suit had...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Supreme Court Still Prohibits Patent Royalties For Activity Occurring After Patent Expires (Kimble V. Marvel)

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court declined to overrule its prior decision in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964), and maintained its ruling that a patent holder cannot charge royalties for the use of his invention where the use...more

Baker Donelson

Supreme Court Leaves Post-Patent Expiration Royalty Rule in Place

Baker Donelson on

The U.S. Supreme Court today in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC upheld the longstanding Brulotte rule that a patent owner cannot continue to receive royalties for sales made after its patent expires. In a 6-3 decision,...more

Mintz

Kimble and Post-Expiration Royalties: The Next Big Thing, or Much Ado About Nothing?

Mintz on

Today, as we previewed here, the US Supreme Court analyzed the question of whether patent holders should be allowed to contract for royalty payments that continue to accrue after the expiration of the subject patent. While...more

Goodwin

The Year Ahead in Patent Law - 2015

Goodwin on

With the advent of the America Invents Act (AIA), public perception of frivolous patent litigation, frequently surrounding cases filed by non-practicing entities (NPEs), has received increasing legislative attention. Although...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

IP Newsletter - January 2015

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

In This Issue: - Castle Defense: Federal Circuit Reinforces Patent Damages Gate in VirnetX - Standards Patent Licensing: Always Apportionment, Sometimes Stacking - Supreme Court to Consider Good-Faith...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Will the Supreme Court Remove Brulotte’s Shadow Over Patent Licensing?

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Although criticized by scholars, antitrust agencies, and the...more

BakerHostetler

U.S. Supreme Court Eases CAFA Removals

BakerHostetler on

Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, in response to perceived (in fact real) concerns regarding potential abuses of the class action process. Among CAFA’s important provisions was the right to remove...more

Robinson & Cole LLP

Supreme Court Opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

Robinson & Cole LLP on

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719. Unsurprisingly, the Court held that a notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act does not need to...more

Goodwin

Supreme Court to Decide Whether License Agreements May Require Payment of Royalties After Patent Expiration

Goodwin on

The U.S. Supreme Court Friday agreed to revisit a longstanding precedent that bars patent owners from collecting royalties after their patents have expired, even if those post-expiration payments represent compensation for...more

29 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide