The termination provision should also explain what happens to intellectual property at the end of the contract. Does intellectual property immediately return to the licensee? Or, as in the case of our inventor, is intellectual property still due to the licensee? A recent case illustrates this complex problem. A toy inventor has sold his entire range of baby toy products to a large toy company in exchange for royalties for the future sale of his products. The non-licensed agreement, which lasted many years, included separate royalty rates for different categories of toys, including a toy phrase that had already been marketed by the inventor (« original toys ») and another phrase for toys « derived » from these original toys. The court found that the licensing agreement effectively gave the Tribunal the right to duckweed to sue for patent infringement. Many types of licensing agreements also include intellectual property laws, such as copyright infringement, trademarks, brand names and patents. Offences are governed by criminal law, not just private civil proceedings. Another important issue in the distinction between breach of contract or violation of the IP is whether the provision of the licensing agreement that has been breached is a contract or a precedent. If the provision were a contract, the violation would only lead to an offence. However, if this provision was a precondition for a precedent, the condition was not met and the treaty did not exist.

Therefore, any use of the investigative period would lead to an offence. In IT Development v Free Mobile, a software developer named IT Development has reached an agreement with Free Mobile, a French mobile operator, on the use of ClickOnLine software. This software allowed Free Mobile to organize and monitor its telephone antennas in real time. IT Development claimed that Free Mobile had changed the source code of the computer program it had authorized and brought an action against it in the French courts, on the grounds that the amendment constituted a copyright infringement. If a party wishes to use copyrighted material, it must negotiate a licensing agreement with the copyright holder. These agreements generally limit the mode of use allowed. z.B. distribution or adaptation cannot be covered by the agreement. The landlocked party, which considers itself aggrieved, can indeed create an important responsibility for itself. When a licensee cancels a licensing agreement, the licensee may suffer damages. For example, if the terminating party revokes the licensee`s right to use his intellectual property, the licensee may be obliged to remove products from the shelves. If the initial termination of the licensee was not justified, the licensee may be on the hook for damages suffered by the licensee.

Par