Intangiblia™
Plain talk about Intellectual Property. Podcast of Intangible Law™
Intangiblia™
Worth Fighting For: IP, Lawsuits, and the Art of Valuation
What's your intellectual property truly worth when it's on the line? Not what you hope or what you feel, but what courts, investors, and negotiators will actually pay. This episode of Intangiblia dives deep into the high-stakes world of IP valuation, where patents, trademarks, and copyrights transform from abstract legal protections into concrete dollar amounts.
We journey through landmark global IP disputes that have defined how creative assets are valued in courtrooms from California to Colombia. The Samsung v. Apple design patent battle set precedent for how much of a product's profit can be attributed to its appearance. Epic Systems v. Tata Consultancy Services revealed the billion-dollar worth of trade secrets when they cross into competitors' hands. Meanwhile, cases like Liffers in Spain demonstrate that even moral rights, the right to be credited for your work, carry financial value that courts will recognize and enforce.
The podcast unpacks three essential valuation methodologies that every creator should understand: cost-based (what it took to create), market-based (what others pay for similar assets), and income-based (what future earnings it will generate). Through fascinating case studies across industries, from pharmaceuticals to streaming services, sneakers to smartphones, we see how these approaches play out in real disputes with massive financial implications.
Beyond methodology, we explore how valuation strategies differ across borders, with emerging economies like India pushing back against one-size-fits-all licensing rates, and Mexico's courts mandating that IP damages reflect genuine commercial impact. The digital transformation adds another layer of complexity, as shown in Disney v. Redbox, where even access codes carried enforceable intellectual property value.
Whether you're protecting your creative work, licensing your technology, or facing infringement, this episode delivers a crucial message: in intellectual property, real power lies not just in registration but in pricing. Because in the world of IP, value isn't what you feel, it's what you can prove.
worth fighting for IP lawsuits and the art of valuation. You've registered your intellectual property Congrats. But now comes the real question what's it worth Not in theory, in court, when you're raising capital, closing a deal, licensing your brand, pitching to investors, securing a loan or turning down a low ball offer from someone who loves your work? Today we're unpacking how the world puts a price on patents, trademarks and copyright. It's methodic, reflective, strategic and intentional, because in IP, value isn't just about protection, it's the number that gets you paid.
Speaker 2:You are listening to Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law playing talk about intellectual property. Please welcome your host, leticia Caminero.
Speaker 3:Hello and welcome to Intangiblia, the podcast exploring the invisible assets shaping our real world. I'm Leticia Caminero, your host, your IP guide and your friendly reminder that sometimes the biggest battles aren't over if you own your creation.
Speaker 1:But how much it's worth and I'm Artemisa, your digital co-host, valuation hype queen and certified calculator of creative chaos If it's protected. I want to know what it's worth in court contracts and cold hard cash.
Speaker 3:Today we're diving into a deceptively simple but compelling question what's the value of your intellectual property? We're talking real numbers, real strategy and real global core decisions, because in IP, the drama isn't just in the infringement, it's in the valuation.
Speaker 1:But before we go any further, a quick note.
Speaker 3:This episode was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence. Any opinions expressed by the AI me and my co-host, artemisa are very bold, very digital commentators are hers alone. Let's keep it fair and factual. Fair and factual Okay, you've got your IP, it's registered, it's yours, but when the time comes to license it, defend it or pitch it, everyone's asking the same thing how much is this worth? That's where valuation enters the chat.
Speaker 1:And no, it's not just guesswork or vibes. Ip valuation is about putting a dollar or peso, euro, rupee or yen on the creative work you've protected. It's not about ideas. It's about what you've legally locked in like a patent, a design, a formula or your brand identity.
Speaker 3:Let's break it down beautifully into three main methods. No stretches are required.
Speaker 1:Method. One cost base. Basically, how much did it take to make this thing? Think time, money, r&d brain power or caffeine-fueled all-nighters.
Speaker 3:Method two market basis. This one asks what are other people paying for similar IP If your design pattern looks like something already sold for a fortune? That sets a benchmark.
Speaker 1:And method three, the juicy one income base. How much money will this generate in the future? We're talking royalties, licensing revenue, projected sales, all the juicy bits that make investors lean in.
Speaker 3:Now these sound neat and tidy, but in real life, valuation is full of friction. Different courts, countries and industries all approach it differently.
Speaker 1:That's why today's episode is packed with real legal battles, from California to Colombia, where valuation was the core issue. Some used cost-based logic, others asked about future earnings. Some courts had to invent creative ways to assign value when data was scarce.
Speaker 3:So if you've ever wondered how a stolen design, a licensing fight or even a moral harm gets priced, stick around, Because these cases don't just make valuation real, they make it matter.
Speaker 1:And trust. Each case we're about to cover it fits into one of those valuation models. Some are classic cost-based calculations, others dive deep into projected royalties and future earnings and some, oh some, are full-on courtroom debates over brand prestige and public confusion.
Speaker 3:So, as we go, try to spot the method behind the madness cost base market, back base income base. They're all in here and how each court chose to apply them. That's where the legal magic and drama happens.
Speaker 1:All right, enough theory. Let's get into the cases and see just how much a patent, a platform or even a sneaker silhouette is actually worth. Let's get into the cases and see just how much a patent, a platform or even a sneaker silhouette is actually worth.
Speaker 3:Let's start strong with the mother of all design wars Samsung v Apple. This wasn't just a patent fight. This was the valuation battle of the decade.
Speaker 1:You know the one the iconic iPhone design. Rounded corners, smooth face, grid of colorful icons. Versus Samsung's Galaxy lineup that well looked suspiciously familiar. Apple said, hey, that's our vibe, and sued for design patent infringement.
Speaker 3:In 2012, a jury awarded Apple over $1 billion zero cents in damages, but the real drama kicked off when Samsung pushed back, not on whether they infringed, but on how much it was worth. This was the valuation showdown.
Speaker 1:And here's where it gets juicy. Apple held design patents, not utility patents. That meant they weren't suing over how the phone worked, just how it looked, and under US law at the time, infringing a design patent meant you could be liable for all profits from the infringing product All profits, as in you copied our phone space.
Speaker 3:Now give us everything you made from it.
Speaker 1:Samsung was like wait a minute. Are we seriously giving Apple the profit from the whole phone just because of a few curves and icons?
Speaker 3:The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court and in 2016, the court said no, you don't automatically owe total profits on the entire product. The key phrase article of manufacture on the entire product.
Speaker 1:The key phrase article of manufacture, translation maybe Samsung old profits only on the front casing, not the whole phone with chips, batteries and features. Apple never claimed.
Speaker 3:That ruling flipped the script on how market-based valuation works in design patent cases. It forced courts to dissect a product and decide what portion of it actually drives value and whether that portion was what got infringed.
Speaker 1:This wasn't just a money fight. It reshaped how designers, brands and lawyers think about IP value. If you can't tie your design to consumer choice or actual profit impact, you may walk away with less than you thought.
Speaker 3:Eventually, apple and Samsung settled in 2018 for an undisclosed amount, but the precedent it lives on. Today, courts apply a much more nuanced valuation approach in design patent fights and companies document their consumer behavior data, like gospel Companies document their consumer behavior data like gospel. So the lesson if you're protecting a design, be ready to prove why it sells, not just why it looks good. All right Time to shift gears from sleek smartphones to seismic sensors and, trust me, the valuation drama here was earth shaking.
Speaker 1:Oh, we're getting geological now. I love it. Let's talk Western Jacoby Ion. This 2018 US Supreme Court case wasn't flashy, but it changed the way companies price IP tied to international business.
Speaker 3:Here's the setup. Western Jaco held patents on marine survey technology, basically equipment that helps oil companies map the ocean floor before drilling. Big money very specialized.
Speaker 1:They were accused of shipping parts overseas that could be assembled into Western JCO's patented tech without a license. Western JCO sued for patent infringement and said hey, we lost out on big overseas contracts because of you.
Speaker 3:Now pause because this is where income-based valuation enters the chat. Western JCO wasn't just asking for damages inside the US. They wanted compensation for the profits they would have earned abroad if Aion hadn't undercut them.
Speaker 1:Aion argued wait, wait. Us patent law shouldn't apply to what happens outside the country Classic extraterritoriality debate.
Speaker 3:But the Supreme Court it didn't buy that territoriality debate. But the Supreme Court it didn't buy that In a 7-2 decision they ruled that Western GECO could recover lost foreign profits because the infringement started in the US with the unauthorized component exports.
Speaker 1:That was huge. Suddenly, patent holders could claim global revenue loss as part of their valuation, not just domestic. Market impact global revenue loss as part of their valuation, not just domestic market impact, but the entire international earnings pipeline.
Speaker 3:This shifted how companies estimate the value of their patents, especially those in hardware, biotech or specialized engineering, because now the global market potential can directly affect your courtroom compensation.
Speaker 1:And, let's not forget, this was a real win for small patent holders who compete globally. Western JECO wasn't a massive brand, but their tech was niche and valuable. They had the receipts and the court said, yep, those receipts matter.
Speaker 3:Valuation takeaway if your patented invention has cross-border potential, document it Earnings projections, missed bids, regional contracts they're all fair game in a damage claim now.
Speaker 1:And in IP, lost opportunity is still opportunity with a dollar sign.
Speaker 3:Next up corporate espionage with a tech twist. We're talking Epic Systems, bond, tata Consultancy Services, a US case that proved just how much confidential information is worth when it crosses into IP territory.
Speaker 1:Oof. This one had it all Fake credentials, sneaky logins and a courtroom price tag big enough to make CEOs sweat. Spoiler alert $940 million zero cents in damages. That's almost a billion dollar whoopsie.
Speaker 3:Anja, here's the backstory. Epic Systems is a US-based software giant that builds health records systems for hospitals, had a consultancy. One of India's largest tech firms was hired by an Epic client to help with system maintenance.
Speaker 1:Instead of just doing the job, some Tata employees allegedly used stolen credentials to access Epic's internal system and downloaded over 6,000 documents Not code, exactly, but manuals, configuration files, tools, basically the IP that teaches you how the engine runs.
Speaker 3:Epic found out and they were not amused. They stood for Trey's secret misappropriation and made a compelling case that Tata used those materials to build and improve their own competing healthcare software.
Speaker 1:Here's where it gets valuation worthy. The court had to determine not just if Tata used the material, but how much value it gave them, because this wasn't a direct copy paste of code, it was stealth learning, short cutting the R&D process.
Speaker 3:Exactly so. The damages calculation leaned into an income-based approach. How much profit did TATAC earn or save by not having to develop that knowledge from?
Speaker 1:scratch awarded $240 million zero cents in compensatory damages and then dropped an extra $700 million zero cents in punitive damages on top, just to make a point.
Speaker 3:He was one of the largest trade secret verdicts in US history, later reduced on appeal. But the message was loud and clear If you shortcut your way to market with someone else's protected know-how, it'll cost you.
Speaker 1:Valuation isn't just about physical patents or trademarks. Sometimes it's about the systems behind the systems, the internal tools, data, processes. If they're protected and commercially valuable, they count.
Speaker 3:And they count big. The key in this case was proving that those 6,000 documents saved Tata time and money and gave them a competitive edge.
Speaker 1:That's where the price tag came from, and it's a reminder to everyone track your trade secrets, mark them, protect them, limit access, because if you ever have to fight over their value, you'll need the receipts.
Speaker 3:Now for a case with a little less math and a lot more heart. We're headed to Spain and into the world of moral rights.
Speaker 1:Oh yes, time to talk about Liffers v Producciones, mandarina. No spreadsheets, just feelings and legal recognition that sometimes IP damage is emotional and economic.
Speaker 3:José Luis Leferre is a cinematographer who created the visual style for a Spanish TV show. When the show got recut and aired without crediting him and with modifications he hadn't approved.
Speaker 1:Leferre sued and he had every right. In many countries, including Spain, creators have moral rights like the right to be credited and the right to object to modifications that harm their artistic integrity.
Speaker 3:Here's the kicker. Liffers didn't sue for copyright infringement in the traditional sense. He sued for damages to his reputation and won reputation and won.
Speaker 1:The court awarded him compensation not based on lost profits but on non-material harm. That's valuation through the lens of artistic identity and professional credibility.
Speaker 3:So what method of valuation are we talking about here? Technically, none of the big three cost-based, market-based or income-based fit neatly, but the court still had to put a number on the damage.
Speaker 1:Exactly. This is what you might call a reputational valuation. The court looked at the industry norms, lifford's standing as a professional and the likely impact on his career. It wasn't just about a missing credit. It was about what that missing credit cost him in prestige, visibility and future work.
Speaker 3:And let's be real in creative industries, reputation is currency and compensate harm to your name, your style, your dignity. It's a great reminder that valuation isn't always about bank statements. Sometimes it's about the invisible value behind the credits and the respect those credits represent. Let's talk standard, essential patents, aka SCPs. These are the patents that are so fundamental, so baked into global tech standards like 4G, wi-fi or USB, that everyone has to use them.
Speaker 1:And if you own one, you're basically holding the keys to the digital kingdom, basically holding the keys to the digital kingdom. Today's case Unwired Planet v Huawei, a UK court drama that shook up how we value those golden keys.
Speaker 3:Unwired Planet had acquired a bunch of steps from Ericsson. We're talking mobile communication tech that powers everything from phone calls to streaming cat videos.
Speaker 1:They offered Huawei a license. Huawei said too expensive, unwired, sued and boom, we've got ourselves a courtroom showdown over what a FRAND license should cost.
Speaker 3:FRAND stands for Fair, reasonable and Non-Discriminatory. It's the gold standard for SEP licensing. But here's the billion dollar question what exactly is fair and reasonable?
Speaker 1:That's where valuation walks in sipping tea like, oh you rang. The court had to decide not just if Huawei infringed, but how much the license should have cost and whether Unwired's offers were in line with global norms.
Speaker 3:And get this. The UK court didn't just look at British markets, it went global, setting a worldwide royalty rate that Huawei would have to pay to use unwired patents everywhere.
Speaker 1:That was groundbreaking because up until then, most SEP battles were local. You're using it here, pay us here. But this ruling said now if you're a global company using global standards, the license is global too.
Speaker 3:So what kind of valuation are we dealing with here? Definitely income based. The court calculated how much revenue the patents could reasonably generate through global licensing Plus a little market based flavor.
Speaker 1:They compared Unwired's offers with other SEP agreements to make sure the rates weren't wildly out of step.
Speaker 3:And, of course, this all sent a message to other patent holders If you're sitting on SCPs and want to enforce them, be ready to back up your royalty demands with solid data Usage rates, comparable licenses, market coverage.
Speaker 1:Because vague demands won't cut it. Courts want valuation, math, not vibes.
Speaker 3:The ruling said, a precedent has been echoed in India, china and beyond. It forced companies to approach SDP licensing as a structure global valuation strategy, not just a numbers game.
Speaker 1:So, yes, owning a standard, essential patent can make you powerful, but only if your licensing terms can pass the global sniff test.
Speaker 2:Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law. Playing talk about intellectual property.
Speaker 3:Time to head to India, and, yes, we're still in the world of mobile technology, india. And yes, we're still in the world of mobile technology, but this time it's Lava International, a local smartphone manufacturer, taking on global telecom giant Ericsson.
Speaker 1:This case is basically the Indian remix of Unwired Planet. Ericsson claimed Lava had been using its standard essential patents again SCPs for things like GSM and 3G connectivity without a license and.
Speaker 3:Ericsson wasn't just asking politely. They wanted Lava to cough up royalties at a global rate rate that had already been challenged as too high in India by other manufacturers like Micromax and Intex.
Speaker 1:That's right. This wasn't Ericsson's first dance. They had already faced scrutiny from the Competition Commission of India for potentially abusing their dominant position by charging unreasonably high royalties, so Lava said wait a second.
Speaker 3:these rates don't make sense in our market. We're selling phone at a fraction of that price squarely onto valuation fairness in developing economies.
Speaker 1:The big question should royalty rates be based on the value of the whole device or just the part that uses the patented tech?
Speaker 3:And what's the income-based value of that little chip inside your phone that connects it to the network? Because if it costs $2, zero cents, should royalties be based on that or on the $100, zero cents phone it?
Speaker 1:powers. Valuation battles like this show that context matters. A fran rate in Sweden might not fly in New Delhi. Courts in India started pushing back, asking for local market evidence, cost breakdowns and data on how much the patents actually contributed to the phone's success.
Speaker 3:And remember Lava wasn't refusing to pay. They were asking for evaluation that made economic sense in their business model. They wanted fair, reasonable and truly non-discriminatory terms, just like the FRAN acronym promises.
Speaker 1:So what was the valuation method? Again, a hybrid. The court weighed income-based projections against market-based comparables, all filtered through India's local realities.
Speaker 3:This case, along with others in the region, helped shape how emerging economies approach IP valuation. It also sent a warning to patent holders you can't just copy paste royalty models across borders. You need cultural, legal and economic fluency.
Speaker 1:And ideally, a calculator that converts Swedish licensing optimism into Indian regulatory realism.
Speaker 3:All right, deep breath. We're jumping into pharma now because if there's one industry where valuation and timing are everything, it's pharmaceuticals.
Speaker 1:Oh yes, this case is Toray v Saway, and the question at the center was this what happens when a generic drug maker delays licensing a patented product and jumps the gun?
Speaker 3:Sawai held a compound patent and a process patent for a key hypertension drug in Japan. Sawai, a generic manufacturer, applied for marketing approval and then launched the drug before concluding a proper license agreement with Toray Not a great look.
Speaker 1:Toray sued, arguing that Sawai had benefited commercially while dragging their feet on formal licensing. Basically, you used our tech, sold it and paid us nothing.
Speaker 3:So what did the Tokyo District Court do? It treated the case like a retroactive license negotiation, but with court oversight. And guess what that meant? Valuation central.
Speaker 1:Yep. The court had to figure out what a fair licensing fee should have been, even though no agreement had actually been signed. Enter income-based valuation. They looked at how much Sawai earned from sales and what similar licenses would have cost in Japan's pharma market.
Speaker 3:The judge didn't just slap on a penalty. They calculated hypothetical royalties, assuming a license had existed, and awarded Ture over 1.3 billion yen in damages, that's roughly 12 million.
Speaker 1:USD. And that wasn't all. The court also confirmed that process patents, not just the final product patents, have independent commercial value. So even if Suai had slightly altered the manufacturing, they were still within Torre's patent fence.
Speaker 3:This case highlighted how valuation can also protect market exclusivity by discouraging generic companies from jumping ahead before licensing terms are settled.
Speaker 1:And it showed that Japanese courts are perfectly comfortable putting a hard number on patent misuse, even when there's no formal contract in place.
Speaker 3:So next time someone tells you IP is intangible, remind them that courts can and will put a yen value on every delayed signature and every unauthorized pill sold, especially when millions in pharma revenue are on the line. Now let's talk about streaming and stealing, because this case shows how copyright violation isn't just about the art. It's about access, audience and the platforms we use to get both.
Speaker 1:Enter Netflix versus Dragon Media. This wasn't some shady torrent site in a dark corner of the internet. Dragon was out in the open selling fully loaded streaming boxes that came pre-installed with apps designed to access pirated content.
Speaker 3:Think of it like this you walk into a store, buy a box that plugs into your TV and poof, you've got access to all the latest Netflix, HBO and Disney Plus shows without paying a single subscription fee, and they even advertise it as better than cable, which, legally speaking, is like waving a red flag in front of every major studio's legal team a red flag in front of every major studio's legal team.
Speaker 3:So Netflix, along with Amazon, hulu and others, hit dragomedia with a massive copyright infringement lawsuit. And here's the juicy part this wasn't just about stopping the sales, it was about proving damages, Because how do you value what was lost when someone streams without paying?
Speaker 1:That's where income-based valuation came in hot, measuring how many subscriptions were likely lost, how many users were diverted and what that cost the platforms in revenue.
Speaker 3:Plus, there was a market-based element too. The court looked at what Dragon Media was earning from selling the boxes and how that compared to the legitimate market value of access to streaming platforms.
Speaker 1:Spoiler. It was nowhere near fair. The court ordered a permanent injunction, shut the whole operation down and awarded a massive default judgment of nearly $14 million zero cents in damages.
Speaker 3:The ruling also reinforced that enable infringement is just as serious as doing it yourself. Draken wasn't streaming the content, but they designed the ecosystem to make it easy and they profited from it.
Speaker 1:So what's the valuation takeaway In the streaming world? Access is the asset. It's not about how many DVDs you sell. It's about how many eyeballs you attract and what those eyeballs are worth in subscriptions, data and ad revenue.
Speaker 3:And courts are very willing to assign a dollar value to each of those missing eyeballs, especially when entire industries depend on it. Let's head to Mexico, where the Supreme Court, the SCJ, and decided it was time to give IP damages a serious upgrade, and not just any upgrade.
Speaker 1:we're talking about a jurisprudential thesis from the top court that basically said if you want to protect IP, you better know how to price it.
Speaker 3:Before this decision, mexican IP lawsuits had a bit of a reputation. Courts were cautious, damages were low and valuation was well inconsistent.
Speaker 1:Enter the SCJN with a bold position. Ip damages can't just be symbolic. They need to reflect real commercial value and courts must evaluate the actual economic harm, including lost profits, market share and potential licensing income, which basically brought income based valuation into the center of the Mexican IP courtroom.
Speaker 3:No more moral victories with one dollar zero cents awards. If your rights were violated and you can prove it, the court will quantify that violation.
Speaker 1:And the SCJN also emphasized a big shift the burden of proof right Shoulders were given greater procedural leverage, including the right to request detailed financial documents from infringers to help calculate the damage.
Speaker 3:So it wasn't just about increasing awards. It was about making valuation evidence more accessible and central to the case. It gave judges the tools and the push to actually use valuation principles in practice.
Speaker 1:That's a game changer, because now, when a copyright or trademark holder sues in Mexico, they can build a damages claim that reflects real world business losses, not just legal theory.
Speaker 3:And it's helped bring Mexican jurisprudence more in line with international standards.
Speaker 1:So what's the bottom line? The court made valuation strategic, legal and non-optional. If you want to defend your IP in Mexico today, you better come prepared with the numbers.
Speaker 3:And if you're an infringer, you better be ready to disclose your books, because the price of playing dirty just got a whole lot higher. If you thought IP only got the latillos in tech or pharma, think again. Only got the latillos in tech or pharma think again. This case is about a sneaker, a slogan and a very famous radio station.
Speaker 1:Let's set the stage. Los 40 is one of Colombia's biggest radio networks Music, pop, culture, gen Z, vibes and a few years back they ran a major campaign using the phrase all-star.
Speaker 3:Now, if you've ever owned a pair of Converse Chuck Taylors, that slogan might ring a little loud. All-star isn't just a phrase. It's part of Converse's globally protected brand identity.
Speaker 1:Converse wasn't having it. They sued, arguing that Lost Forty's use of All-Star created brand confusion, diluted their trademark and basically piggybacks off the cultural equity they'd built over decades.
Speaker 3:And here's where valuation comes in. Converse it and just say you use our phrase. They said you use our brand equity and now we want compensation for what that's worth.
Speaker 1:Which means this wasn't about a lost shoe sale. It was about the value of brand identity and how much a non-authorized use in another industry, like media, could harm perception and revenue.
Speaker 3:The court agreed that there was unauthorized exploitation of a registered trademark, and they used a mix of market-based and income-based methods to assess the damage, and income-based methods to assess the damage.
Speaker 1:Basically, they looked at the value of Converse's trademarks in Colombia, advertising costs and how much a similar ad campaign would have cost if Los 40 had actually licensed the phrase.
Speaker 3:The ruling reinforced that trademarks aren't limited by sector.
Speaker 1:Just because you're not selling shoes doesn't mean you can casually use a brand's signature phrase to hype your concert series, and it was a win for brand owners everywhere, showing that even in Latin America, valuation isn't just about physical goods. It's about reputation, market positioning and the power of a phrase.
Speaker 3:So, yes, in the world of IP, even two little wars like All-Star can come with serious legal price tags. All right Time to close with the classic Disney twist. And no, this isn't about Cinderella's copyright. It's about digital codes, licensing rights and whether buying a DVD gives you the right to resell the piece of the magic.
Speaker 1:Enter Disney v Redbox Around 2017,. Redbox you know the DVD kiosk company used to see at the grocery store came up with a creative way to compete in the digital era.
Speaker 3:They started buying up Disney DVD combo packs. They kind of include a Blu-ray disc, a regular DVD and a digital download code. Then they crack open the boxes, pull out the digital code and sell it separately for cheap.
Speaker 1:Basically, redbox was like hey, you want Disney's Moana or the Force Awakens for five bucks? Just take this code no streaming service, no license, no subscription, just the code and a smile.
Speaker 3:Disney's response A full-blown lawsuit. They claimed Redbox was violating the license terms attached to those digital codes, which clearly stated they were not for resale and intended for personal use only.
Speaker 1:Here's the fun part. Redbox tried to argue that once they bought the DVD pack, they owned all of it physical discs and digital rights included. They called it first sale doctrine you buy it, you can sell it.
Speaker 3:But Disney clapped back with the ultimate IP rebuttal not so fast. That applies to tangible goods, not licensed digital content. The download codes weren't sold, they were licensed, and that license came with strings attached.
Speaker 1:Exactly so. This case became a litmus test for the value of digital IP and whether courts would recognize that even a code has legal teeth if it's tied to licensing restrictions and valuation wise.
Speaker 3:This case was a perfect example of how access can be an asset. Disney wasn't just protecting a piece of plastic. They were protecting their entire digital distribution model streaming rights, platform partnerships, bundle pricing and how they monetize content beyond the DVD shelf.
Speaker 1:The court issued a preliminary injunction stopping Redbox from selling the codes, but the real headline was that the judge agreed with Disney's position. Reselling a digital license without permission is a violation of IP rights.
Speaker 3:And it affirms something critical Valuation in digital markets isn't about what something costs to produce. It's about how it's licensed, how it's accessed and how that access drives revenue.
Speaker 1:So, whether it's a streaming password, a QR code or an app download, if it's tied to a license, it's got value, and if you try to unbundle that value for resale, expect a studio's legal team at your door.
Speaker 3:In the end, the Simbi Redbox helped reinforce that digital IP has boundaries, even when it looks like a 12-digit string of letters and numbers.
Speaker 1:And that IP law, even in its most classic forms, is evolving to prize access, not just ownership.
Speaker 3:So what did we learn on this whirlwind tour through the world of IP and its price tags?
Speaker 1:Besides the fact that even a download code or a slogan can cost you millions. Let's hit the top five.
Speaker 3:Lessons One valuation is an optional strategy. Whether you're suing for infringement or closing a licensing deal, you need to know your IAP's value. Courts, investors and buyers all expect you to bring numbers, not just feelings.
Speaker 1:Two the method matters Lost profits, that's income-based cost of creation, that's cost-based going rates for similar assets, market-based the strongest cases. Use the right mix of methods and backed it up with evidence. Re-licensing terms are law, not suggestions From Qualcomm to Disney. If access is tied to a license, courts will enforce the fine print. Valuation lives in the contract, so write and read them wisely.
Speaker 3:Or IPBD, travels across borders and courts are catching up. Whether it's Mexico's Supreme Court, India's front battles or Colombia's commerce case, jurisdictions are aligning with global standards and treating IP as a business asset, not just a legal one.
Speaker 1:Five protection is just the beginning. Real power lies in pricing. A registered right means nothing if you don't know what it's worth. These cases showed us that the real flex isn't filing a patent. It's negotiating with confidence because you know its market impact, its licensing potential and its courtroom strength.
Speaker 3:So next time someone asks you is that trademark really worth anything? You'll know the answer and you'll know the method to prove it.
Speaker 1:Remember in IP value isn't what you feel, it's what you can prove, and the better your proof, the better your prove. It Remember in IP value isn't what you feel, it's what you can prove, and the better your proof, the better your payout.
Speaker 3:Thanks for listening to Intangibilia. If you've enjoyed this episode, share it, review it or, even better, price it, protect it and profit from it.
Speaker 1:We'll see you next time. And hey, if anyone tries to lowball you, just send them this episode.
Speaker 2:Thank you for listening to Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law playing. Talk about intellectual property. Did you like what we talked today? Please share with your network. Do you want to learn more about intellectual property? Subscribe now on your favorite podcast player. Follow us on Instagram, facebook, linkedin and Twitter. Visit our website wwwintangibliacom. Copyright Leticia Caminero 2020. All rights reserved. This podcast is provided for information purposes only.