In two separate cases Visibility Corp. (Andover, MA) sued defendants for copyright infringement related to the plaintiff’s software and materials. The complaint alleges that Visibility had previously granted a software license to the defendants’ parent company or prior entity but that at some point afterwards, the defendants were sold / merged but continued to use the software, now without a license. The complaint also alleges that the license agreements prohibited transfers of the software without Visibility’s consent.
In the first case the defendant is Hudson Products Corp. (Sugar Land, TX). The complaint alleges that Hudson’s parent had rights to the software but when Hudson was sold to a different parent it continued using the software, only now without a license.
In the second case the defendants are Schilling Robotics, Inc. (Davis, CA) and Alstom USA, Inc. (Windsor, CT). The software was originally licensed to GEC Alstom Schilling. The complaint alleges that GEC’s assets, including the software, were then transferred to Alstom USA and then to Schilling Robotics, who held itself out to Visibility as GEC. Visibility did not consent to these transfers. This case also alleges breach of contract when Schilling purportedly poached one of Visibility’s employees in violation of a non-solicitation clause.
This is not an uncommon problem. Entities get bought and sold all the time and all too often these transfers can wreak havoc on rights relied on by the entities, but sometimes not actually granted to the entity directly.
Visibility Corp. v. Hudson Prods. Corp., 10-12279-RGS (D. Mass. Dec. 30, 2010)
Visibility Corp. v. Schilling Robotics, Inc., 10-12280-JGD (D. Mass. Dec. 30, 2010)
Comments