InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 45
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/20/2017

Re: Fasctrack post# 21155

Thursday, 05/04/2017 11:43:29 AM

Thursday, May 04, 2017 11:43:29 AM

Post# of 73584
Hi Fasctrack, without knowing the TRUTH of the ViaDerma, Otiko, Keough, Philips case I have to go on just the merits of IP federal law. If Keough had an "expired" patent, ViaDerma/Otiko could just pick it up and/or modify without much worry unless there were trademark elements that were "non-functional" in nature - things that make Keough IP identifiable in appearance. If Keough has an "abandoned" patent it still protects the original creation and date of creation for the IP and cannot just be picked up or modified by ViaDerma / Otiko without a Chain of Title change or assigning of rights, which gets more difficult because of the fact that it is already abandoned. Of course, there are extenuating circumstances on either side, but that's the gist of how it works.

This is a very complex case for ViaDerma / Otiko and Keough, and truly even Philips unless he has a separate attorney who can get him out of the mix by stating he never sold it to Otiko. Either way though, IF ViaDerma can prove it has created an entirely new IP which is NOT based on Keough's IP (which doesn't seem to be the case) OR IF ViaDerma has a lot more money to play with, it can stand a decent chance of coming out on top. But if ViaDerma is banking on just the fact that the IP was abandoned, leadership is going to be in for a very unpleasant surprise.