Preview

X-It and Kidde

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1059 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
X-It and Kidde
X-IT and Kidde As a start-up company, intellectual property is one of the most valuable assets, especially as a protective barrier to competing companies. The protection of intellectual property is essential for the livelihood of a young company that is working to get their product to market. As a result, when a start-up deems that a competitor has infringed upon their intellectual property, it is in their right to take legal action against said competitor for the infringement. This was the case with X-IT, who saw Kidde Safety’s production of a similar emergency escape ladder as a direct violation of their intellectual property. In the court of law, X-IT can make numerous claims against Kidde Safety in regards to the emergency escape ladder. First and foremost, X-IT can claim that Kidde violated confidentiality agreements that the two companies agreed upon. In these confidentiality agreements, executed on June 8, 1999, it clearly states that X-IT would give information on its business, financial condition, operations, assets, and liabilities in exchange for the agreement that all information delved would remain confidential. This included only telling those employees within Kidde that needed the information for evaluation of whether or not Kidde should acquire X-IT. It also meant that any information given would only be used for the sole purpose of making this evaluation and nothing else. However, Kidde did not satisfy these terms. First of all, Kidde began investigations of whether they could produce their own similar product without violating any of X-IT’s pending patent application. In court, this could be interpreted as using the information disclosed as part of the confidentiality agreement for purposes other than those designated by X-IT, namely for determining whether it was worthwhile for Kidde to purchase X-IT. Kidde was potentially using the information they had received from X-IT to see whether they could avoid acquiring X-IT and produce a competing

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    BUS 640 Week 4 Problems

    • 718 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Since the business has a patent over the item, it can act as a monopolist while determining its profit maximizing level of output and price.…

    • 718 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hrm/531 Week 5

    • 4281 Words
    • 18 Pages

    Product differentiation helps reduce the threat of new entry by forcing potential entrants to an industry to absorb not only the standard costs of beginning business but also the additional costs associated with overcoming incumbent firms' product differentiation advantages.…

    • 4281 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Explain how some companies use different strategies to protect their product with short life cycle from being copied by other international violators.…

    • 381 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    X

    • 483 Words
    • 2 Pages

    supports the trial court's conclusion that Bourque did not assume the risk of Duplechin's negligent act.…

    • 483 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    OI/361

    • 650 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thriving corporations may not be exclusively accountable for the formation of an original thought. However, to benefit from the notion, should take part in a main function in establishing the thought in the purchasers’ mind for proceeds. Additionally in the first workshop readings; the article titled “The Innovation Sandbox” by writer, Prehalad (2006), presents the similarity of innovation as a sandbox in which innovation is presented like a “fairly complex, free-form exploration and even playful experimentation within extremely fixed specified constraints” (Prehalad, 2006.)…

    • 650 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Heather Evans Case

    • 561 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Evans also quickly proceeded with the rental of a business space to more accurately assess future risks while formulating a business plan, and although she wanted to lead the design technicalities, she did not have the best design proficiency. Her recruitment policy also has some associated risks because her assistants are completing most of the work without a higher level of commitment to the company. Positive relations with important providers in the industry such as distribution channels, suppliers, and showrooms, represent a very important factor for success, but she failed to present her strengths and weaknesses on this matter. While projected licensing revenues were emphasized, Heather did not analyze the effects of indiscriminately name licensing during the 1970s. A competitive advantage for this business concept and protection from copy cats was not mentioned in the plan either and cash flow assumptions were unclear. We know that the margins are high for Heather’s company and that sales are volatile, but she could have included a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate the difference between the best case scenario and what is most likely to…

    • 561 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case Study

    • 542 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Tessera can invest their own product lines to produce their inventions. This will protect the inventions from being taken by their licensees. In addition, those manufacturers who infringe will not pay the cheap back damage, but a high penalty based on how many products they produce.…

    • 542 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    X-IT and Kidde Case Study

    • 1335 Words
    • 4 Pages

    A fear that most companies hold when collaborating with another is of protecting their proprietary technologies. X-IT had this fear as well and applied for a patent. Unfortunately, due to a lack of money and in turn a lack of knowledge power, they were unable to protect their innovation from Kidde. Kidde, with the help of an unethical attorney, worked around X-IT’s still processing patent to “legally” create a similar ladder. Nonetheless, X-IT does hold a fair amount of ammunition against Kidde.…

    • 1335 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Forensics Case Summary

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages

    challenged by the entrance of a competitor able to provide low cost versions of the…

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Currently, in the United States, 12% of states, including Vermont, Oregon, and California have legalized the Right to Die. This debate around whether or not to help patients who have terminal illness end their lives has been and is still far from over. The definition of Right to Die is, “an individual who has been certified by a physician as having an illness or physical condition which can be reasonably be expected to result in death in 24 months or less after the date of the certification” (Terminally Ill Law & Legal Definition 1). With this definition, the Right to Die ought to be available to any person that is determined terminally ill, as determined by a professional.…

    • 2370 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Carrot or Stick?

    • 1347 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Tessera was an innovative developer company for the miniature technologies which were widely used in the production of consumer electronics devices. Company’s inventions mainly focus on advanced chip packaging for microelectronic devices and image capturing devices. The company practiced what intellectual property attorneys referred to as “ carrot licensing”. Carrot licensing is a model where a company invents and patents a new idea. Then the company is licensing the idea to other companies with the trade secrets and know-how, and helps them to implement the innovation to the production. The opposite model to carrot licencing is the “stick licensing”, in which a company used either the threat of or actual litigation to extract license from target companies. Tessera used to use carrot licensing but they were forced to use the stick a bit more.…

    • 1347 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hals Woodworking

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages

    References: Brandon, John. October 3, 2011. How Small Tech Companies Can Protect Big Ideas. Retrieved from http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/news/how-small-tech-companies-can-protect-big-ideas…

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Ip Audit

    • 1483 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In many cases SME’s do not have the resources to conduct a full audit of all its IP and will find it difficult to put a value to each of the components making up an IP portfolio. Putting aside these difficulties, and at the risk of reducing the exercise to the “too-hard basket” it is important for every business to document and value what is, in many cases, its most important intangible assets.…

    • 1483 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    While “egregious discrimination” might refer to licensors’ conduct that unduly manipulates bargaining power to threaten standard implementers’ investment in developing standard-complaint products, the term “similarly situated” does not have a precise definition. Taking this into consideration, Carlton and Shampine define “similarly situated” as any firm using common component, even when some firms produce more profit than others. When firms derive “the same incremental value” from the patented technology, they contend, they should pay exactly the same royalty…

    • 1643 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    International B

    • 652 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Firm-specific advantage (FSA) at the firm level manifests itself in a higher productivity of comparable assets (tangible and intangible) than competitors (Caves, 1996). Since imitation of the advantage by competitors entails high costs and high risks,the owner of the advantage is protected for a certain period of time. Since the crucial firm-specific advantages are intangible (including strategic behaviour),they are mobile within the firm at low marginal costs. Hence, integration of value-added activities (Feenstra, 1998) within the firm (i.e., internal exploitation of advantages) is an optimal strategy. Patents is an obvious example of a firm specific advantage…

    • 652 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics