The final chapter of Bobrowicz16 provides a useful checklist for licensing negotiations. For the experienced technology transfer professional or contract lawyer, the idea of establishing a detailed checklist for each licensing agreement may seem like an unnecessary job. But the same professionals could probably tell stories in which a missed detail provision or a vague provision of the contract led to an expensive and lengthy litigation. Given the importance of the efforts made, it is certainly in the interest of the IP stakeholders to ensure that every detail is verified and verified. If several agreements are negotiated at once, it is reasonable to think that something could be missed. In order to avoid this unfortunate and potentially costly error, this chapter offers a complete but flexible checklist, which can be provided to manage the details of licensing agreements. Although the author provides a template for most elements of the license, he quickly finds that users must adapt the checklist to their respective business practices. Fines can be imposed on parties to agreements that violate the ban and the agreement itself is unenforceable, which is often of even greater concern to the parties concerned. A technology licensing agreement is an agreement involving an owner (conedant) of a technological intellectual property who accepts compensation (counterparty) to have someone else (licensed) used, modified or resold. It does not apply to agreements in which the parties` market shares exceed certain thresholds and where those thresholds vary depending on whether they are competitors or not. It is essential to properly determine the market in question in assessing market share. In addition to the broader aspects of licensing, this section of the manual contains a number of chapters that address more specific IP licensing strategies.
Licensing and licensing outside plant varieties are two sides of the licensing equation. Licensing plant varieties can increase market share and create a competitive advantage by meeting customer needs. The licensing of varieties also expands or complements a company`s portfolio of varieties, both for internal breeding programs (facilitating access to livestock materials) and for licensed varieties ready for commercialization. The most common reason for licensing outside varieties is that one company maximizes the return on investment by allowing others to produce and sell in markets that cannot be satisfactorily achieved by the current marketing body. Two international agreements, the Madrid Agreement and the Madrid Protocol, govern the international registration of trademarks. For plant brands, the understanding and use of these provisions is increasingly important for developing countries. Many tropical and subtropical regions are rich sources of new fruit products, and an owner of such a product will want to adopt a strategy that both stimulates global demand for the product and maximizes commercial returns. Brands will be an integral part of such protection of intellectual property rights and global marketing strategies. In particular, three critical aspects should be taken into account if the brand`s new products are to be successfully imported from developing countries: the complex and rapidly evolving nature of agricultural biotechnology requires (currently) that each licensing agreement be adapted to the particular context in which the invention is used. However, such licenses should not be invented from the outset and Cahoon`s chapter explains both the common and unique aspects of the agro-biological license.
For practical purposes, it will be useful for each organization to develop its own internal presentation agreements4, which will then be modified and adapted to each particular circumstance.