Trademark license agreement status

[Scott Glaser]

On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:24:42 -0400
Pamela Chestek <pchestek at redhat.com> wrote:

> Scott Glaser wrote on 09/18/2009 08:17 PM:
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:41:56 -0400
> > Pamela Chestek <pchestek at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> Scott Glaser wrote on 09/17/2009 08:29 AM:
> >>     
> >>> Is there not a way to put in a statement that "At the Licensors
> >>> discretion some registration fees my be reimbursed based on
> >>> terminating the contract under favorable terms."  
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >> Thanks for the suggestion. I've amended the agreement to add at the
> >> end of Paragraph 3 these sentences: "Unless the Agreement was
> >> terminated under Paragraph 3(a), at Licensor's discretion Licensor
> >> may reimburse terminating Licensee for reasonable domain name
> >> registration fees. There will be no reimbursement available if the
> >> Agreement was terminated under Paragraph 3(a)." You can see the
> >> addition on the wiki page.
> >>
> >> Pam
> >>     
> >
> > Pam,
> >
> > I believe that you meant the addition to paragraph 3 to read as
> > listed below:
> >
> > Unless the Agreement was terminated under Paragraph 3(a), at
> > Licensor's discretion Licensor may reimburse terminating Licensee
> > for reasonable domain name registration fees. There will be no
> > reimbursement available if the Agreement was terminated under
> > Paragraph 3(b). Licensee agrees to remove any Web Pages content
> > immediately if in Licensor's sole discretion such removal is
> > warranted.
> >
> > V/R
> >
> > Scott Glaser
> >
> >
> >
> >   
> If I'm reading correctly that you changed the second 3(a) to 3(b), I 
> meant it the original way. With just the first sentence, the "unless" 
> clause creates an ambiguous situation - what happens if it IS
> terminated under 3(a)? So the second sentence was added to explain -
> if it's terminated under 3(a) (material breach), you're out of luck.
> Under 3(b), it might be a situation where it would be fair to pay for
> the domain name, for example if it was a trademark infringement claim
> against "Fedora," which wouldn't be your fault.
> 
> If it's not clear, though, I'd welcome any suggestion to improve the 
> language.
> 
> Pam
> 


Pam,

Sorry for the delay, but somehow this got snatched up by my spam
filter.  But Upon you explanation I re-read that section and realized I
misread that entire portion.  To me that verbage looks correct and good
at this point.  I was hoping more people would have interest in this
document, however it does not appear that way.  I will re-read the
document one more time to ensure that I see no other obvious issue and
let you know if I have any more suggestions.  Thanks for you time this
far in responding to our concerns.

V/R

Scott Glaser