��Ƶ

142 No implied obligation to exploit under a patent licence

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY vol 21(1) patents and technology transfer

142 No implied obligation to exploit under a patent licence

| Commentary

In the absence of express provision being made, there will not normally be an implied term that a licensee will manufacture or use

View the latest version of this document, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to ��Ƶ or register for a free trial

CONTINUE READING

Powered by Lexis+^®

View full volume

View full volume

(2) TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND LICENSING

143.1 Introduction

143.2 Best endeavours

143.3 Reasonable endeavours

143.4 All reasonable endeavours

144 Implied obligation to pay a reasonable royalty for a patent

145 The payment of interest on royalties for patents

146 Whether time is of the essence for the payment of patent royalties

147 Currency in which patent royalties should be paid and reference to ‘pounds’

148 Payment of royalties beyond the scope of a patent, after the expiration of a patent or termination of a licence

149 Royalty sharing (‘royalty stacking’)—IP licences

150 Other points arising on the payment of patent royalties

151 Termination for failure to allow auditing of accounts—patent licences

152 Right to inspect accounts to continue after termination of a patent licence agreement

153 Maintaining patents in force, requirement to pay royalties

154 Requirement to bring or defend proceedings for patent infringement

155 No challenge clauses in intellectual property agreements—implied terms under English law where competition laws are not applicable

156 The meaning of a ‘business’—intellectual property agreements

157 Most favoured licensee clauses—patent licences

158 Normal terms of a patent licence

159 Periods of time—intellectual property agreements