To protect our intellectual property rights, we rely on a combination of federal, state, and customary laws, as well as contractual restrictions. We rely on trade secrets, copyrights and trademarks to protect our intellectual property. We track the registration of our domain names and trademarks in the United States. Our trademarks in the United States include the “iHispano” brand with stylized logo, the “Black Career Network” brand with stylized logo, the “Professional Diversity Network” brand with our slogan “the power of millions for the benefit of one”, the name “National Association of Professional Women” and “NAPW” as well as the names “International Association of Women” and “IAW”. We also own the copyright to certain articles in NAPW publications. We strive to exercise control over access to our intellectual property and custom technology by entering into confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees and subcontractors, as well as confidentiality agreements with third parties in the ordinary course of business. Because we rely on third-party funding sources to provide funds to enforce our intellectual property rights, we rely on potential sources of funding to realize the value of our intellectual property. Because we do not have the means to sue to enforce our intellectual property rights, we depend on the assessment provided by the potential sources of funding for our intellectual property. When deciding whether or not to allocate funds to IP litigation, funding sources must assess the strength of our patents, the chances of success, the nature of potential defendants, and whether there is sufficient potential recovery to justify a significant investment in IP litigation. Typically, these funding sources receive a percentage of recovery after process costs and attempt to achieve a sufficient return on investment to justify the investment.
If that funding source does not believe that it will get a sufficient return on investment, it will not fund litigation. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to negotiate funding agreements with third-party funding sources on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Because of our financial situation, we may only be able to obtain financing on less favourable terms than we otherwise could. In addition, according to IPMA, part of the intellectual property is considered to be the joint property of Lockheed Martin and the splitco subsidiary (the “joint intellectual property”), each party having an equal and undivided interest in that intellectual property. Each party has the right to freely exploit the common intellectual property outside the scope of ipma without liability between them, and any improvements, updates or modifications made to the common intellectual property after the date of distribution are the property of the party making such improvement, update or modification. We need significant funding to grow our business. Our business requires significant funding for the valuation and acquisition of intellectual property rights, as well as for the development and implementation of programs to monetize our intellectual property rights, including the continuation of litigation necessary for us to monetize our intellectual property rights. Our failure to develop and implement these programs could both jeopardize our relationship under our existing agreements and affect our ability to generate new business, either through the acquisition of intellectual property rights or through exclusive management agreements. We cannot be profitable if we are not able to obtain the necessary funds to grow our business, including litigation to monetize our intellectual property. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain the necessary financing or grow our business. In the future, third parties may assert claims that call into question the inventory or ownership of our intellectual property.
We have concluded written agreements with employees that provide for the ownership of the intellectual property of our cooperations. These agreements stipulate that we must negotiate certain commercial rights with employees with respect to joint inventions or inventions of our employees resulting from the results of the cooperation. In some cases, there may not be adequate written provisions to deal clearly with the resolution of intellectual property rights that may result from the cooperation. If we are unable to successfully negotiate sufficient property and commercial rights in inventions arising from the use of third-party materials if necessary, or if other disputes arise regarding intellectual property developed with the use of employee technology, we may be limited in our ability to exploit the market potential of such intellectual property rights. In addition, we may face claims from third parties that our agreements with employees, contractors or consultants that require them to transfer intellectual property to us are invalid or in conflict with previous or competing contractual obligations, which could result in property disputes over the intellectual property we have developed or will develop and our ability to: undermine the commercial value of this intellectual property. A dispute may be necessary to resolve a property dispute, and if we fail, we may be prevented from using certain intellectual property rights or lose our exclusive rights to that intellectual property. Both of these results could hurt our business. As intellectual property enforcement disputes become more common, it may become more difficult for us to voluntarily license our intellectual property. We believe that the more frequent IP enforcement actions become, the more difficult it will be for us to voluntarily license our IP rights. As a result, we may need to increase the number of our IP enforcement actions to incentivize infringing companies to license ip or pay damages for lost royalties. Funds received by the faculty member and the college or university from the sale of the intellectual property jointly owned by the faculty member and the college or university will be allocated and spent in accordance with the specific agreement set forth herein: [shall be negotiated by the parties.] 10. Intellectual Property.
That certain intellectual property cross-licensing agreements, dated the date of this press release, between GE and Baker Hughes, a ge, LLC company, as amended from time to time, in accordance with the terms of this agreement (the IP Cross License Agreement), constitute the grant to Newco of GE`s intellectual property in connection with the Products, Parts and Equipment Listed in Appendix D, Govern the Services, Technologies and Systems Used by GE O&G to Manufacture and Sell Such Products, Parts, Equipment, Services, Technologies and Systems as of the Balance Sheet Date. (c) Intellectual property. The employee agrees that all rights, title and interest in all works of any kind created in the course of his employment with the employer belong to the employer. The Employee agrees to return, delete or destroy to the Employer in any form (including computer files and other electronic data) of the Employer in its possession no later than the Effective Date, including, but not limited to, all copies (in any form) of all files or other information provided to the Employer, affect its officers, employees, directors, shareholders, customers, suppliers, vendors or distributors, as well as any business or commercial opportunity of the employer. (b) Assignment. The Officer agrees to assign to the Company and hereby assigns to the Company all intellectual property rights that may arise during the term of this Agreement. See Assignment of intellectual property for additional elements such as notification and collaboration. Given the changing legal environment and the development of contracts and policies in the field of IP, the AAUP believes that the creation of a Standing Committee on IP representing both faculty and administration would serve a useful purpose in both collective and non-collective bargaining. Such a committee could serve a variety of purposes, including keeping faculty and administration on technological changes that will affect the legislative, contractual and political context. Such a committee would play a role in policy-making and play a dispute resolution role. In the absence of such a general political committee, a dispute resolution committee with administrative and faculty representation is essential. The common intellectual property clause used in most types of agreements specifies that each party retains ownership of its intellectual property; that is, unless otherwise provided in the agreement, the agreement affects the ownership of their intellectual property.
(a) If the work is created by an independent contractor, the work can only be considered a commissioned work if all of the following conditions are met: Jointly Developed Intellectual Property. In the event that the parties jointly develop the intellectual property, the parties negotiate in good faith to establish their respective rights. In the event that the parties are unable to reach an agreement on such jointly developed property, each party shall have the same ownership and rights in such intellectual property, without further obligation and without liability to the other party. The CGP Term Loan Facility (see Note 5, “Liabilities” and Note 16, “Subsequent Events”) is secured by first priority privileges over substantially all of the Company`s assets, including the Corporation`s intellectual property. .