• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

McCarter & English Logo

  • People
  • Services
  • Insights
  • Our Firm
    • Leadership Team
    • Social Justice
    • Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
    • Pro Bono
    • Client Service Values
    • Alumni
  • Join Us
    • Lawyers
    • Summer Associates
    • Patent Professionals
    • Professional Staff
    • Job Openings
  • Locations
    • Boston
    • Philadelphia
    • East Brunswick
    • Indianapolis
    • Stamford
    • Hartford
    • Trenton
    • Miami
    • Washington, DC
    • New York
    • Wilmington
    • Newark
  • Share

Share

Browse Alphabetically:

  • A
  • B
  • C
  • D
  • E
  • F
  • G
  • H
  • I
  • J
  • K
  • L
  • M
  • N
  • O
  • P
  • Q
  • R
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • V
  • W
  • X
  • Y
  • Z
  • All
Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Litigation
Blockchain, Smart Contracts & Digital Currencies
Business Litigation
Cannabis
Coronavirus Resource Center
Corporate
Crisis Management
Cybersecurity & Data Privacy
Delaware Corporate, LLC & Partnership Law
Design, Fashion & Luxury
E-Discovery & Records Management
Energy & Utilities
Environment & Energy
Financial Institutions
Food & Beverage
Government Affairs
Government Contracts & Global Trade
Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
Healthcare
Hospitality
Immigration
Impact Investing
Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Life Sciences
Manufacturing
Products Liability, Mass Torts & Consumer Class Actions
Public Finance
Real Estate
Renewable Energy
Sports & Entertainment
Tax & Employee Benefits
Technology Transactions
Transportation, Logistics & Supply Chain Management
Trusts, Estates & Private Clients
Venture Capital & Emerging Growth Companies
  • Broadcasts
  • Events
  • News
  • Publications
  • View All Insights
Search By:
Insights News Courthouse Columns
Main image for Attorneys React to Supreme Court Patent Royalties Case
News|Quote

Attorneys React to Supreme Court Patent Royalties Case

Law360

6.22.2015

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises that leaves intact a 50-year-old rule barring royalty agreements that continue after a patent expires. Here, attorneys tell Law360 why the decision is significant.

Erik Paul Belt, McCarter & English LLP

“Many innovative companies will view Kimble as a missed opportunity to modernize the anachronistic five-decade-old Brulotte rule and bring it into line with how product development and commerce works. Any sector with heavy upfront costs or long lead times to commercialization — for example, life sciences — felt the sting. Willing parties should be free, absent coercion, to structure royalty obligations as they see fit. Kimble forces those businesses to creatively structure royalty obligations to reflect — as best they can — commercial and economic realities. For example, parties can specify a reduction in royalty rates after patent expiration to reflect other benefits of the bargain.”

Eric E. Grondahl, McCarter & English LLP

“The Kimble decision, while nominally maintaining the status quo, may result in unnecessary, increased complexity in patent licenses. This will increase the cost of negotiating licenses and may subject more licenses to legal challenge. Licensors seeking to avoid the limits imposed by Brulotte — and now Kimble — will have to look to license other, nonpatent rights, such as trade secrets, to continue royalty streams after a patent expires. Counsel working on these agreements must be careful to identify the nonpatent rights with sufficient specificity to ensure such agreements are enforceable.”

sidebar

pdfemail

Related People

Media item: Erik Paul Belt
Erik Paul Belt

Partner

Media item: Eric E. Grondahl
Eric E. Grondahl

Of Counsel

Related Services

Intellectual Property
Patents
Subscribe to our Insights
McCarter & English, LLP
Copyright © 2023 McCarter & English, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
  • Login
  • Attorney Advertising
  • Privacy
  • Awards Methodology
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Sitemap

The McCarter & English, LLP website is for informational purposes only. We do not provide legal advice on this website. We can provide legal advice only to our clients in specific inquiries that they address to us. If you are interested in becoming a client, please contact us, but do not send any information about your specific legal question. We cannot serve as your lawyers until we establish an attorney-client relationship, which can occur only after we follow procedures within our firm and after we agree to the terms of the representation.

Accept Cancel