Whether the parties to an agreement had intended to transfer the copyrights as part of its overall transfer of intellectual property was a question of material fact that should not have been decided by the court on summary judgment.
An agreement between two affiliated companies did not unambiguously prohibit the transfer of copyrights as part of what the agreement called “Know-how” because the language reasonably was susceptible to more than one interpretation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in vacating a district court’s grant of summary judgment to a copyright defendant. The district court also vacated the dismissal of claims related to the purported assignment of claims to the plaintiff from its predecessor but upheld the denial of attorney fees on a separate false advertising claim, and remanded the matter (Evoqua Water Technologies LLC v. M.W. Watermark, LLC, October 7, 2019, White, H.).
Case date: 07 October 2019
Case number: Nos. 18-2397/2398
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.
_____________________________
To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Copyright Blog, please subscribe here.
Kluwer IP Law
The 2022 Future Ready Lawyer survey showed that 79% of lawyers think that the importance of legal technology will increase for next year. With Kluwer IP Law you can navigate the increasingly global practice of IP law with specialized, local and cross-border information and tools from every preferred location. Are you, as an IP professional, ready for the future?
Learn how Kluwer IP Law can support you.
