Royalties (conclusion) Revenue from the sale or use of a licensed product or process. What I call the poor relation of licensing plays an underestimated and often underused role in the recitals. Although technically of no legal significance, the recitals offer the possibility of explaining, in simple language, the underlying subject matter of the agreement. Here, the parties can explain to the reader what brought them together and what they hope to accomplish, in concise and simple prose. This can be of great help if the agreement is concluded by a third party (e..B g. a judge who is well informed in the law, but who is not at all informed of the nuances of activity in a given sector, let alone the technological advantages generated by the exchange of intellectual property rights resulting from the implementation of the agreement. It therefore deserves more than temporary attention and could be pronounced with great particularity. They must, however, ensure that the recitals do not go so far as to penetrate into the tactical elements of the agreement and thus create inconsistency within the agreement. Knowing that the potential licensee wishes to license his company`s trademark, the licensor by nature has the strongest position in the negotiation. Therefore, the licensor can and should use this knowledge to its advantage to ensure that the brand is protected and that shareholder value is maximized. You`ll never get the licensing agreement your technology deserves.
You will get the license agreement you negotiate. In this context, it is important for inventors, licensees and intellectual property lawyers to constantly improve their negotiating capacity. Here are some pertinent thoughts. Confidence maintained for the specified duration _____; without limitation of time______; Living ofagreement______ As with the definitions, the grant clause is a challenge to write, if only because it is at the heart of the agreement. The grant clause should be structured in such a way that the different rights are allocated according to the specific type of intellectual property transferred. Just as many generals proclaim that battles are won or lost before they are fought, smart negotiators recognize that they should avoid fair fights at the negotiating table. Instead, they should pile up the cards in their favor before reaching the negotiating table. Consider the negotiations that followed when Donald Trump identified the location of the trump tower construction.
The owner of the property was Leonard Kandell. Kandell was also an experienced real estate tycoon who preferred to retain ownership of the land and rent it out for the long term. Trump preferred to praise the country rather than own it directly. One would think that a deal between Trump and Kandell could be reached relatively easily, as there was a vote of interest. Trump knew, however, that negotiations without negotiations with Kandell would not lead to the most optimal results. Before starting negotiations with Kandell, Trump negotiated the purchase of air rights from Tiffany & Co. During these negotiations, Trump realized that Tiffany had an option to acquire Kandell`s property at fair market value. Trump arranged for this option to be included in the air rights agreement. As a result, Trump had a stick in the form of an option to acquire Kandell`s property if no favorable leasing terms could be negotiated. There are advantages of an intermediary Once the battlefield has been defined, it is worth thinking about how the licensee is arrested. You have the slightest leverage if you speak directly to the potential licensee.
When inventors call licensors directly, their deflationary image in the eyes of the potential licensee of a successful inventor to that of a seller. address the licensee on behalf of the inventor. First, the intermediary probably has a relationship with the right people with the different licensors. . . .