Replies to post #139445 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[PatentGuy1]

Could li use the branding “liquidmetal” on ce products after February 5th

I believe that it doesn't matter whether you mean "Li" the individual, Eontec or LQMT. In each case the answer, IMO, is no.

LQMT:

LQMT cannot use the brand name "LIQUIDMETAL" on CE products after February 5th, 2018. The expiration of the ROFR does not affect the other rights granted to Apple under the MTA.

Under the MTA, Apple received exclusive and perpetual rights to LMT technology. The MTA defined LMT technology to include "Intellectual Property" and "Intellectual Property Rights". Intellectual Property Rights was defined to include Trademarks, and the trademark "LIQUIDMETAL" was on of the marks included. Consequently, Apple has exclusive and perpetual rights to the brand "LIQUIDMETAL" in the field of CE.

See, MTA Annex 6 for "exclusive" and "perpetual" license of LMT Technology to Apple;
See, MTA, Section 1(a)(i) for definition of LMT Technology;
See, MTA, Section 1(a)(iii) for definition of "Intellectual Property Rights; and
See, MTA, Schedule 1 for trademarks subject to the agreement.
http://contracts.onecle.com/liquidmetal/apple-transaction-2010-08-05.shtml

Because LQMT granted Apple the exclusive and perpetual rights to the brand "LIQUIDMETAL" in the field of CE, LQMT cannot use the brand itself in that field nor grant the right to anyone else, and the expiration of the ROFR does not alter Apple's exclusive and perpetual rights to LQMT Technology.

Eontec:

Rights granted to Eontec under the cross licensing agreement were exclusive of CE. Consequently, Eontec cannot use brand in CE.

Li:
Li was never granted any rights to use LQMT IP.

Any attempt by LQMT to grant Li, Eontec, or anyone else the rights to the brand "LIQUIDMETAL" would be a breach of contract under the MTA.