Koffsky Schwalb LLC
  • Home
  • Attorneys
    • Mark I. Koffsky
    • Efrem Schwalb
    • Gary Serbin
    • Steven A. Weg
    • Daniel E. Baron
    • Tal S. Benschar
  • Practice Areas
    • Business Law
    • Civil Litigation
    • Intellectual Property
    • Employment Law
    • Real Estate
  • Blog
  • Contact
Phone: (646) 553-1590 | Fax: (646) 553-1591

Beyond The Legalese

Caught in the Web: When The Spider-Man Patent Expired So Did the Royalties

9/30/2013

0 Comments

 
Picture
In 1990, Stephen Kimble invented a Spider-Man toy that allowed a child to “role play” as Spider-Man by mimicking Spider-Man’s webshooting abilities with foam string.  Kimble filed a patent for his invention and, around the same time, met with Marvel to discuss licensing his patent and other ideas.  Kimble and Marvel did not have a written agreement but Kimble claims that Marvel agreed to compensate him if any ideas were used.  Marvel subsequently told Kimble that it was not interested in his ideas. Despite its supposed lack of interest, Marvel began manufacturing a similar Spider-Man role-playing toy.  In the meantime, Kimble's patent application issued and Kimble sued Marvel for patent infringement and breach of contract.  The parties settled in 2001 and Marvel bought the patent from Kimble for a lump sum and a 3% running royalty based on net sales.

Peace reigned until 2006, when a royalty dispute resulted in Kimble filing a new lawsuit for breach of contract.  Marvel counterclaimed for a declaration that it was no longer obligated to pay Kimble based on the sale of products after the expiration of his patent.  The Ninth Circuit reluctantly agreed with Marvel, finding that a  Brulotte v. Thys Co., a 1964 Supreme Court decision forbidding patent holders from collecting royalties after the expiration date of the patent controls.  Many judges and scholars have criticized Brulotte as making little economic sense.  But unless the Supreme Court revisits its earlier precedent, Mr. Kimble's stream of web-shooting royalties has run out.  Check out a commercial for the toy here:

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.



    Categories

    All
    Civil Procedure
    Constitutional Law
    Copyright
    Corporate
    Employment Law
    International
    Internet
    Litigation
    Media
    Patent
    Privacy
    Real Estate
    Software
    Tax Law
    Trademark


    Archives

    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    November 2015
    October 2015
    July 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    September 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013

    RSS Feed

     349 Fifth Avenue | Suite 733 | New York, NY 10016 | T: 646.553.1590
  Attorney Advertising | Legal Notices | Privacy Policy
Proudly powered by Weebly