Moschino and Allison In Eyewear Venture

Moschino and Allison In Eyewear Venture

By Luisa Zargani MILAN —

Moschino has signed an agreement with Allison SpA to produce and distribute the brand's eyewear collection for the next five years.The agreement replaces a previous deal with Luxottica. The first collection produced by Allison will bow at Paris' Silmo, the international eyewear exhibition held in October."Allison highlights the creative component of the collection, the DNA of our brand — this is the reason we've decided to link up with them," said Thierry Andretta, chief executive officer of Moschino. "Our design team is heavily involved in all the different steps that go into any license and we wanted it to be no different for our eyewear collection. With Allison, it's more about signature pieces."Silvio Vecellio Reane, chairman and ceo of Allison, based in Padova, said, "Our peculiarity is that we exalt creativity and we don't want to standardize products. We sell emotions and we want to give stores the opportunity to offer something new and different — there are so many similar products out there."In December, Allison inked a licensing deal with Benetton and already counts licenses with Gianfranco Ferré, Vivienne Westwood, Missoni, John Richmond, Dunhill, Mercedes-Benz, Dirk Bikkembergs and Roberta di Camerino.

I thought this was a good article because it shows how a smaller company can get big recognition by licensing themselves with a well known company. Allison seems like a wonderful company becuase of the unique pieces and different products, I think this is a good move for Moschino as long as their chemistry is good. It looks like this Allison company is making a lot of deals, so they should be careful as to not over license themselves. This article is a good lesson on licensing yourself, and if you want to read the rest the link is: http://www.wwd.com/search/article/114960?query=licensing

-Kristen Carnie

Yamamoto Designs for Mikimoto

Jeannette Park Tue Apr 10

New York - Mikimoto has tapped fashion designer Yojhi Yamamoto to create a collection for the venerable jewelry house. The two Japanese houses will join forces and design a 20-piece collection that will focus on Mikimoto's star gemstone, the pearl, it was announced Tuesday.
"The pearl is a symbol of feminine perfection, and, in the quintessential universe of fine jewelry, it stands alone," the jewelry house noted. "For these reasons…Mikimoto's incomparable reputation for designing, producing and selling the world's finest cultured pearl jewelry made it a perfect choice for Yohji Yamamoto."
This is the first time Mikimoto has collaborated with a fashion designer to create a collection of this magnitude. In 2001, the jewelry house launched a fashion designer collection that combined talents with Badgley Mischka, Oscar de la Renta, Carolina Herrera and Vera Wang to create individual pearl jewelry complements.

Mikimoto, one of the top jewelry companies to house one of natures most beautiful gemstones, the pearl, is collaborating will designer Yojhi Yamamoto to create a star collection. This collection is like no other since this is the first time Mikimoto is working with a designer to produce a collection of this size. I believe that whenever a designer or celebrity name is placed on an item, whether it is luxury or not, it sells. Not only do people purchase these items because to the name, but the purchase as a keepsake. This collection could have potential to be worth money some day due to the exclusivity of the item and collectors status. Companies are getting wise with new ideas since they know a familiar face will sell their goods. H&M for one has been doing excellent with their designers collections offered in the past such as Victor & Rolf, Karl Lagerfeld and Madonna. Yamamoto has already his name out in the industry in a variety of ways including designs for Adidas. Designers are teaming up with companies internationally to make a name for themselves and the business. Truthfully, it’s the only way to survive.

Jackie Webb

http://news.yahoo.com/s/fwd/20070410/en_fashion_fwd/yamamotodesignsformikimoto;_ylt=Alv_eHuKyEDog0gKOJecMCRPWrsF

Chinese playwright tries to outfox 20th Century Fox

Interesting case from China where a science fiction writer, Li Jianmin, has sued 20th Century Fox Film Corporation for copyright infringement. In this lawsuit, which opened on April 11th in the Intermediate People's Court of Dongying, Shandong Province, Li alleged that Fox's 2004 movie The Day After Tomorrow copied the creative concept and the plots of two plays he completed in 2001 and 2002. He claims that the film, in which most of the world is destroyed because of global warming, contains 308 scenes that were described in his plays. He does not seek any monetary damages, and only wants to be "respected for his work" and have Fox acknowledge the copyright infringement plus pay his legal costs.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/movies/1402AP_China_Movie_Lawsuit.html

This case of copyright infringement is interesting because it will be very difficult for the writer to prove that Fox copied his plays and stole his plot. The main question would be how Fox would even get to see his plays which are unpublished and seen by very few of Li's friends. His case is further weakened by several other stories and plays that have talked about the world collapsing as a result of global warming. Also, I like the fact that he only wants respect and acknowledgement and not cash. Of course, that could change if he wins in China and decides to pursue a big claim in the U.S.! Another interesting aspect is the growing Chinese awareness of intellectual property (IP), since till now, most cases were about foreign firms protecting their IP in China and this represents a reversal of roles.

Ritu Dhillon

APPLE COMPUTER

Now – during the 2007 membership drive to help fund this web site – is as good a time as any to mention that I did pick up one new side gig recently: a rotating spot as a back-page columnist in Macworld magazine. The April 2007 issue, on newsstands now, has my first column: “Apple’s Computer, Incorporated”.
The point of which, more or less, is that the handwringing over Apple’s corporate name change from “Apple Computer” to just plain “Apple” is foolish. The idea is that the name change is a sign that the company is shifting its focus from computers to consumer electronics like iPods, Apple TV, and the iPhone.
What they’re missing is that the entire consumer electronics industry is shifting toward making computers; Apple’s advantage is that they design better computers, have a better OS, and write better software than any of their competitors. They’re arguably more of a computer company now than they were 10 years ago. When’s the last time you heard someone call for them to get out of the hardware business recently? (For most of the 1990s, there were dozens of jackass columnists and “industry analysts” calling for Apple to do just that.)
The release of Apple TV has proven this point. The reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, the main points being that it’s fun and easy. Great software, well-integrated with cleverly-designed hardware – which pretty much describes every successful product Apple has shipped in the last 30 years.
Under the hood, Apple TV is a Mac. Its OS is a slightly modified version of Mac OS X, with its Front Row-style user interface provided by a new application that replaces the Finder. (According to Macworld’s Jason Snell, Apple’s code name for the Apple TV app is “Back Row”.)
And because it’s Mac OS X, if you want to hack on it, you can. The device has only been shipping for a few weeks, and already there’s Apple TV Hacks, a web site chock full of information on how to diddle with an Apple TV.
Apple TV effectively has two completely different interfaces. For the mass market, there’s the official UI: on the software side, a simple software app that makes media sharing across a home network easy and fun; hardware-wise, a few simple ports between the Apple TV and your TV and stereo. Apple TV offers fewer options and fewer features than most of its competitors in the “home media server” space. It’s the iPod strategy: Pick the important features, implement them really well, and present them in an obvious UI.
But for nerds and hackers, there’s an entirely different interface: Mac OS X. Is it for the faint of heart? No. Is it sanctioned? No. But Apple’s stance on Apple TV hacking is clearly neutral, not antagonistic. Apple TV’s official UI has fewer options than competing products, but its unofficial capabilities offer far more hackability for nerds.
One common knock against Apple is that they design products that are “too closed”, but it seems clear that Apple TV is in fact more hackable than Xbox, PlayStation, Wii, or TiVo. Apple TV seems to strike the perfect balance – regular people never have to get their hands dirty with complex nerdery, but those of us who want to easily can. ★

I don't agree with the change of name to just Apple.They are known for Apple Computer and the market is shifting to making computers.Apple Computer does have a variety of high tech accesories........but Apple Computer is just what the company has always been known for.I don't like the change of name much,but we just have to wait and see how the public responds to it.

By: Stephanie Carcamo

New York & Co. Signs With Inter Parfums

Published: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 NEW YORK — Inter Parfums Inc., which produces personal care products for Gap Inc. and is the fragrance licensee for Quiksilver, has a new client — women's wear retailer New York & Company Inc. Inter Parfums and New York & Co. said Wednes­day the fragrance producer would design and manufacture a new line of personal care products to be carried at New York & Co.'s 562 retail stores in the U.S. and on nyandcompany.com."We anticipate that the initial line of bath and body products will be in New York & Co. stores late this year or early next year," Jean Madar, chairman and chief executive officer of Inter Parfums, said in a statement with New York & Co. "The products that we are developing are designed for the target New York & Co. customer, the fashion-conscious, value-sensitive woman between the ages of 25 and 45."

Hey Everyone! Since we all love perfume I thought this is a good article. New York and Company is now teaming up with Inter Parfums, tomake a new line of perfumes and body products. I think this is a great idea because maybe this will bring a younger crowd into the store and expand their target market. This licensing deal is very smart on New York and Company's behalf for many reasons. One reason mainly is that bath and body products represent an ideal new category for brand extension. So when it comes out you should go check it out!

--- Renata Levin

Paramount to Oversee its licensing

Paramount Licensing will oversee worldwide licensing and merchandising for films and related product categories, including programs for Paramount Pictures, Paramount Vantage, DreamWorks, Nickelodeon Movies, and MTV Films, from the Paramount Pictures’ Hollywood offices. Paramount Licensing programs will extend across a broad range of categories, including consumer products, book publishing, themed restaurants, theme parks and location-based entertainment, live stage plays and film clip licensing.

Hey class! I thought this article was very interesting, because we are always looking at clips from movies and seeing how branding and licensing applies to them. In this article Paramount is expanding their marketing internationally. In doing so they have made programs for which the films are released including many of their animated movies, such as Charlotte's Web and Bubba Gump Shrimp Co.(from the movie Forrest Gump)...Hope you enjoy the article!

http://www.playthings.com/article/CA6432126.html

Lauren Barnett

Licensing 1:35pm

Reebok Files Suit Versus Nike Alleging Patent Infringement

By Liza Casabona

NEW YORK — Reebok International Ltd., a subsidiary of Adidas Inter­national, has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Nike over alleged infringement of its collapsible shoe technology.

According to documents filed on April 3 in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas, Reebok alleged that a number of Nike's products infringed on a patent Reebok obtained in January. The Nike products Reebok complained about in its suit are "Free," "Free Flex," "Free Zen & Now," "Free Trainer" and "Free Trail." The Reebok patent protects the technological design features of its collapsible shoes, which include flexible materials in the sole.

Reebok has filed a lawsuit against Nike stating that some of Nike's products have infringed on a patent Reebok has. This is not the first time that Reebok and Nike have had a lawsuit over technology patents, but Reebok has the right to its intellectual property. Getting a patent protects new ideas and technology, and companies need to respect that and come up with their own ideas. Reebok is doing their best to protect any new innovations in the sneaker industry.

Alexandra Artim

http://www.wwd.com/search/article/114589?query=patents

Post Options

Labels for this post: e.g. scooters, vacation, fall

Google, AFP Settle Suit and Sign Licensing Deal

Agence France-Presse, a global news agency based in Paris, has settled its lawsuit against Google Inc. and will allow the Internet search leader to post news and photos from AFP journalists.
The deal, announced Friday, settles the copyright infringement lawsuit that AFP filed in March 2005 accusing Google of posting news summaries, headlines and photos without permission.
Financial details of the settlement were not disclosed.
The deal will allow Google to use headlines and photos on Google News and other services that drive online traffic to sites displaying AFP news. The companies did not disclose where else AFP's news would be used by Google.
Google settled a separate dispute with The Associated Press last August. At that time the two companies disclosed a new business relationship under which Google will pay AP for news and photos, but financial details of that arrangement weren't disclosed.
"With the other major Internet players like AOL, Yahoo or MSN, we have been licensing our content to them for years and years," he said.
Scherer said Google would make use of AFP news in novel ways, but he declined to provide details.

By Seth Sutel
April 6, 2007 11:05AM

Hey Everyone, i thought this was interesting! In a new deal announced on Friday, Agence France-Presse will allow Google to use headlines and photos on Google News and other services that drive online traffic to sites displaying AFP news. Eric Scherer, AFP's director for strategic planning and partnerships, said the wire service is pleased with the Google deal because "the work of our journalists and photographers will be recognized in a normal way," he said. Google said in a statement that the deal will "enable the use of AFP's newswire content in innovative, new ways that will dramatically improve the way users experience newswire content on the Internet."

Michele Piccolino

http://www.newsfactor.com/news/Google-and-AFP-Sign-Licensing-Deal/story.xhtml?story_id=0120013P9IYO

NEW LIFE SCIENCE COMPANIES

Many emerging growth companies face patent licensing issues. In particular, new life science companies usually require the "in-licensing" of intellectual property that will establish the essence of their company. Patent licensing raises a host of critical legal and business issues that the company will need to address appropriately in order to ensure it has the right level of protections as it approaches the marketplace. This article highlights several key issues facing companies that want to obtain a license to practice under a patent. First, the company must determine if it will obtain an exclusive or non-exclusive license. A patent license is a waiver by the licensor of the right to exclude the licensee from practicing under the patent rights. Licensees would prefer to obtain an exclusive license if possible. In addition to the commercial disadvantages of a non-exclusive license, a non-exclusive licensee acquires no affirmative rights with respect to the enforcement of the licensed patents. Unless the non-exclusive license specifically provides some protections, the licensor has no duty to protect the non-exclusive licensee’s interests in the event of patent infringement, abandonment of the patent, or other licensee’s with better terms. The licensor may want to preserve the ability to license to several licensees in order to ensure that the patent rights are fully utilized, instead of tying the patent rights to just one entity. One of the biggest fears of a licensor is that the licensee will not fully commercialize the intellectual property and the licensor is left with nothing to show for its patent efforts. As discussed below, the licensee can address these fears by including certain provisions, such as minimum royalties or milestones that the licensee must meet, or by limiting the license to a particular field of use.

Now days patent licensing issues are very popular.Many companies are getting sued or companies are suing other companies.As mentioned above New Life Science Companies is debating whether to go with an exclusive license or a non-exclusive. I believe an exclusive license is the best choice,you get more protection vs a non exclusive license that aquires no affirmative rights with the respect to the enforcement of the license patents.

By: Stephanie Carcamo

Six Is a Magic Number for BMI’s Digital Licensing Center

BMI’s Digital Licensing Center (DLC) is celebrating its sixth anniversary and is maturing at a rapid rate. With nearly 500 websites licensed through the service and 5,000 registered users, the DLC is the music industry’s first fully automated, end-to-end solution for securing a music performance license online. The license allows website to publicly perform all of BMI’s 6.5 million copyrighted works from its more than 300,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers.
The service was the first complete end-to-end solution launched by a major music industry organization. BMI launched the application in May of 2000, with version 2.0 debuting in 2004 with additional features. In 2006, nearly 200 additional users secured their performing rights license through the DLC.
I believe it is a great thing because the DLC has met its mandate to simplify music copyright licensing because small websites need dedicated resources where htey can license their properties and pay their public performance fees. And I also think that it has helped simplify the licensing process and helped BMI reduce costs associated to this licensing area.
Fama Sow