Lasercomb America, Inc. v. Job Reynolds Larry Holliday, and Holiday Steel Rule Die Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding the copyright holder misused its copyright by including in licensing agreements a provision that neither the licensee company nor its officers, employees, et al., could develop competing goods for the term of the agreement, ninety-nine years
• holding the copyright holder misused its copyright by including in licensing agreements a provision that neither the licensee company nor its officers, employees, et al., could develop competing goods for the term of the agreement, ninety-nine years
• explaining that “[t]he question is not whether the copyright is being used in a manner violative of antitrust law ... but whether the copyright is being used in a manner violative of the public policy embodied in the grant of a copyright.”
• reversing trial court’s injunction and award of damages because “[the plaintiff] should have been barred by the defense of copyright misuse from suing for infringement of its copyright.”
• rejecting the district court’s use of a rule of reason analysis
• discussing Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger, 314 U.S. 488 (1942)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).