security interests over intellectual property rights: the ucc 9 approach in the united states steve...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States
Steve WeiseProskauer Rose LLPLos Angeles
March 2015
1
![Page 2: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Issues
•Federal v. state law•Creation of security interestAssignment of IP rights
•Perfection methods•Enforcement•Full citations for court decisions listed at end
![Page 3: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Federal v. state law
• Tensions between Federal regulation of IP and state law through Uniform Commercial CodeUCC adopted in every state
• Preemption by Federal lawExpress preemptionField preemptionConflict preemption
• Generally, when there is preemption in this area, conflict preemption appliesUCC preempted only to the extent of conflict
![Page 4: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Kinds of intellectual property• Intellectual property
Copyrights Patents Trademarks Domain names Trade secrets and know-how
• Rights to use intellectual property Licenses ‘in’ vs. licenses ‘out’Licensor rightsLicensee rights
Exclusive licenses vs. non-exclusive licenses
![Page 5: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Intellectual property classified under UCC•General Intangibles:Registered and unregistered IP
•Goods:‘Embedded software’
•Accounts:License fees/royalties
![Page 6: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Creation of security interest
• UCC § 9-203(b)(2) requires that the debtor have: ‘rights’ in the collateral or the power to transfer rights in the collateral to a secured party
• Effect of IP law on ability of debtor to create a security interest in the various IP-related rightsEffect of Federal lawEffect of anti-assignment provisions in licenses (license royalties and licensee rights)
![Page 7: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Anti-assignment issues
• Scope of UCC §§ 9-406, 9-408 provisionsPayment rightsOther contract rightsRecall that Article 9 applies to sales of accounts
• Effect of contract terms + other laws• Does not override conflicting Federal law
![Page 8: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Scope – payment rights – UCC § 9-406• ‘Security interest’ permitted despite anti-assignment provision in:Accounts, including royalties (except health-care-insurance receivable)IP royalties not ‘IP’ for purposes of federal law
Chattel paperPayment intangibles (except sales)Promissory notes (except sales)
![Page 9: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Payment rights: effect of contract terms – UCC § 9-406• Ineffective to limit in any way:Creation + attachmentPerfectionEnforcement
•May not declare default
![Page 10: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Scope – other contract rights – UCC § 9-408•Assignment of rights under:
General intangibles, including licensee’s rights
Promissory notes (sales only)Health-care-insurance receivables
•Applies to payment intangible or promissory note only if a sale of the rights
![Page 11: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Other contract rights: effect of contract terms and other laws• Ineffective to limit in any way:Creation + attachmentPerfection
•May not declare default•Does not allow the secured party to enforce its security interest
![Page 12: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Creation of security interest – the IP itself
•No dispute on ability of owner of IP to create a security interests in the IP
•Perfection issues discussed below
![Page 13: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Creation of security interest – copyright licensee• Harris (9th Cir. 1984) (Bankruptcy trustee could not
assign copyright licenses as ‘mere licensee’ per Copyright Act of 1909; a license is not an ‘interest’ in a copyright)
• Nike (9th Cir. 2002) (Exclusive licensee could not assign copyright licenses per Copyright Act of 1976; entitled to the ‘protection and remedies’ of the copyright owner, but not the right to assign)
• Cincom Systems (6th Cir. 2009) (corporate merger effected an impermissible assignment of a non-exclusive copyright license, applying Federal common law)
![Page 14: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Creation of a security interest – patent licensees• Federal common law says patent licenses are
not assignable without the consent of the licensor
• Licensees hold ‘personal,’ not ‘property,’ interests in the patent Catapult (9th Cir. 1999) (licensee cannot
assign rights without consent of licensor under Bankruptcy Code § 365(c))
CFLC (9th Cir. 1996) (licensee cannot assign rights without consent of licensor under Bankruptcy Code § 365(c))
![Page 15: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Creation of security interest – trademarks• Assignment must include transfer of associated goodwill
(no ‘assignments in gross’)• Trump (Bankr.D.Del. 2015) (rights of trademark licensee
not assignable without affirmative consent of licensor)• RCR Marketing (M.D.N.C. 2010) (secured party with
security interest in trademarks was not entitled to preliminary injunction against an alleged infringer, allowing transferee continued, monitored use if it pays a fee; policy at work?)
• Dixie Mills (N.D. Ga. 2010) (secured party with a security interest in trademarks and associated goodwill did not have ‘goodwill’ after original trademark owner’s business operations ceased)
![Page 16: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Creation of security interest – other IP type rights•Domain Names
Kremen (9th Cir. 2003) (domain name is ‘property’)
![Page 17: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Perfection - general
•For intangible assets, general rule under UCC is filing of a financing statementFile in state of ‘location’ of debtorTypically state of organization
Can cover future assets
![Page 18: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Perfection - patents
• Does the U.S. Patent Act preempt Article 9? UCC § 9-109(c)(1) and § 9-311 35 USC § 261 (‘assignment, grant or other
conveyance’ means transfers of ownership only; ‘subsequent purchaser or mortgagee’ means purchaser, not a trustee or lien creditor)
• Cybernetics (9th Cir. 2001) No preemption as to perfection for patents File with Patent and Trademark Ofice anyway to
defeat buyer?• Coldwave (Bankr. D. Mass. 2007) (follows Cybernetics
and clarifies that PTO filing alone does not perfect)
![Page 19: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Perfection - copyrights
• Does the U.S. Copyright Act preempt Article 9? 17 USC § § 101 and 205(c) (‘transfer’ is broadly defined to include any mortgage or hypothecation, as well as exclusive licenses)
• Aerocon (9th Cir. 2002) Unregistered (until registered) - UCC Registered - Copyright Office File under UCC anyway? See also Peregrine
• Need new filing to cover after-acquired registered copyrights
![Page 20: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Perfection - trademarks
•Does the Lanham Act preempt Article 9?15 USC § 1060 (‘assignment’ means transfers of ownership only)
•Trimarchi (D. Mass. 2000) Always UCC
•File with PTO anyway?•Royalty stream and licensee rights
UCC filing
![Page 21: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Perfection – domain names
•General intangible•Always UCC
![Page 22: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Perfection – copyrights
• Nuts and bolts of a Copyright Office recordation17 USC § 205 + Copyright Office CircularsConstructive notice:Must reasonably identify the work (would be revealed by a reasonable search of the title or registration number)
Search by work
![Page 23: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Perfection - royalties
•Royalty stream and licensee rightsNot treated as ‘IP’Generally governed by UCCBroadcast Music (9th Cir. 1997) (copyright royalties were validly assigned without filing with the Copyright Office)
![Page 24: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Priority
• General rule of UCC priority: First secured party to file or perfect
• Customary Article 9 lien priority rules apply when Article 9 applies to collateral, but also note: Patent Act 35 USC § 261 Lanham Act 15 USC § 1060 Assignments are void against subsequent
purchasers for valuable consideration without notice
• Copyright Act 17 USC § 205 rules apply when the Copyright Act applies to collateral
![Page 25: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Purchase money security interest• ‘Super-priority’ under UCC•Sometimes available when collateral is goods – UCC § 9-103(c)
•When is related software included?‘Integrated’ transaction
![Page 26: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Chattel paper
•Record evidencing a monetary obligation and a security interest in specific goods
•When is software included?Used in goodsUCC § 9-324(f)
![Page 27: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Disappearing collateral
• Effect of licensor’s rejection of license in licensor’s bankruptcy Bankruptcy Code § 365(n) (addresses patents,
copyrights and trade secrets as ‘intellectual property’ under § 101(35A))
Sunbeam Products (7th Cir. 2012) (allows trademark licensees to continue to use the IP after rejection)
Collectively address Lubrizol (4th Cir. 1985)• Patents – if not enforced• Trademarks – if not associated with goodwill
![Page 28: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Enforcement - which law
• Generally state law• Copyrights:
Hendrick & Lewis (9th Cir 2014)• Patents
Ager (Supreme Court 1881) Olive Branch Holdings (Ohio 2009)
• Trademarks and trade secrets• Domain names
Office Depot (9th Cir. 2010)
![Page 29: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Enforcement
• Standing of secured partyDoes secured party have sufficient IP rights to enforce IP itself?
• Drafting suggestionsSecured party requires notice of all disputes
Notice of debtor’s default if intellectual property pledged
Consider tri-party agreement with domain name registrar
![Page 30: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Case citations (in alphabetical order)• Aerocon Engineering, Inc., v. Silicon Valley Bank (In re
World Aux. Power Co.), 303 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2002)• Ager v. Murray, 105 U.S. 126 (Supreme Court 1881)• Bank of North Carolina v. RCR Marketing, LLC, 2010 WL
5020502 (M.D.N.C. 2010)• Braunstein v. Gateway Management Services Limited
(In re Coldwave Systems, LLC), 368 B.R. 91 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2007)
• Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Hirsch, 104 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 1997)
• Brown Bark II, L.P. v. Dixie Mills, LLC, 732 F.Supp.2d 1353 (N.D. Ga. 2010)
![Page 31: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Case citations (in alphabetical order)• Cincom Systems Inc. v. Novelis Corp., 581 F.3d
431 (6th Cir. 2009)• Everex Systems, Inc. v. Cadtrak Corp. (In re
CFLC, Inc.), 89 F.3d 673 (9th Cir. 1996)• Gardner v. Nike, Inc., 279 F.3d 774 (9th Cir.
2002)• Harris v. Emus Records Corp., 734 F.2d 1329
(9th Cir. 1984)• Hendrick & Lewis, 766 F.3d 991 (9th Cir 2014)• Kremen v. Cohen, 337 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2003)
![Page 32: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Case citations (in alphabetical order)• Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers,
Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir. 1985)• Moldo v. Matsco, Inc. (In re Cybernetic Services, Inc.),
252 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir. 2001)• National Peregrine, Inc. v. Capitol Federal Savings &
Loan Association of Denver (In re Peregrine Entertainment, Ltd.), 116 B.R. 194 (C.D. Cal. 1990)
• Office Depot, Inc. v. Zuccarini, 596 F.2d 6965 (9th Cir. 2010)
• Olive Branch Holdings, LLC v. Smith Technology Development, LLC, 181 Ohio App.3d 479 (Ohio 2009)
![Page 33: Security Interests Over Intellectual Property Rights: The UCC 9 Approach in the United States Steve Weise Proskauer Rose LLP Los Angeles sweise@proskauer.com](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062520/5697c0271a28abf838cd63da/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Case citations (in alphabetical order)• Perlman v. Catapult Entertainment, Inc. (In re
Catapult Entertainment, Inc.), 165 F.3d 747 (9th Cir. 1999)
• Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. Chicago American Manufacturing, LLC, 686 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2012)
• Trimarchi v. Together Development Corp., 255 B.R. 606 (D. Mass. 2000)
• In re Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc., 2015 WL 756873 (Bankr.D.Del. 2015)
• Valley Bank and Trust Company v. Spectrum Scan, LLC (In re Tracy Broadcasting Corp.), 696 F.3d 1051 (10th Cir. 2012)