Posted April 27, 2013
hedwards: He's under no legal requirement to defend anything other than any trademarks involved.
Or at least that's how it is in the US, you get the copyright automatically and you only have to enforce it if somebody infringes and you want them to compensate you for it. You're under no legal requirement to use it or lose it. Same goes for patents.
Now, there may be reductions to what you can be awarded if the party infringing was led to believe that you wouldn't be enforcing your rights, but you don't lose the rights just by virtue of not using them.
Unfortunate but true.
That does seem to pave the way for patent and trademark trolls.Or at least that's how it is in the US, you get the copyright automatically and you only have to enforce it if somebody infringes and you want them to compensate you for it. You're under no legal requirement to use it or lose it. Same goes for patents.
Now, there may be reductions to what you can be awarded if the party infringing was led to believe that you wouldn't be enforcing your rights, but you don't lose the rights just by virtue of not using them.
Unfortunate but true.