have made rights

Spanish translation: derecho a delegar la fabricación / derecho de fabricación

GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:have made rights
Spanish translation:derecho a delegar la fabricación / derecho de fabricación

01:33 Feb 10, 2021
    The asker opted for community grading. The question was closed on 2021-02-13 23:54:58 based on peer agreement (or, if there were too few peer comments, asker preference.)


English to Spanish translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Patents
English term or phrase: have made rights
Hola a todos y todas.

¿Podrían ayudar con este término? He encontrado el significado en diccionarios y textos monolíngües, pero no encuentro una traducción.
Liliana Morales Carrasco
Mexico
Local time: 05:44
derecho a delegar la fabricación
Explanation:
CoreBrace found out that Star used third-party contractors to make the licensed products, which Star would subsequently use. CoreBrace terminated the license and then sued for patent infringement and breach of the agreement.

Star moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim. In granting Star’s motion, the district court reasoned that a patent licensee’s right to “make” an article includes the right to have others do the work connected with the product. CoreBrace appealed.
One of CoreBrace’s arguments was that it retained the “have made” rights, which were not expressly granted and, therefore, retained by CoreBrace under the terms of the license.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 18:46:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

n general, a "have made" right, which is derived from the term "to make" set forth in 35 U.S.C. $ 271(a), permits a licensee to have an unlicensed third party make a licensed product for the licensee. There are no magic words to grant a licensee "have made” rights.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 18:50:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Have Made Rights. The licenses in Section 3.1 above shall include the right to have contract manufacturers and foundries manufacture Lumentum Licensed Products for any member of the Lumentum Group (including private label or OEM versions of such products) solely within the Lumentum Field, and are not intended to include foundry or contract manufacturing activities that any member of the Lumentum Group may undertake on behalf of Third Parties, whether directly or indirectly.
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/have-made-rights

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 19:00:32 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Have Made Rights. The licenses granted to HBIO in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 above shall include the right to have Third Parties manufacture and distribute products of HBIO, subject to the distribution rights granted to HART under the Product Distribution Agreement.
(en el sitio lawinsider hay más ejemplos que brindan contexto)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2021-02-11 01:02:41 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

La estructura es similar a la siguiente:
I will have my hair cut tomorrow.

Licensees have the right to have "the product" made by a Third Party
"derecho de mandarlo a hacer" (según especificaciones) por un tercero pero dada la formalidad de un texto legal, la traducción literal queda muy "pobre".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 24 mins (2021-02-11 01:57:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Muy interesante el artículo: "The inherency of the patent right to have made" article que menciona el caso CoreBrace vs Star que genera jurisprudencia.PDF (2 págiinas)
Se puede descargar de: https://www.jmbm.com/
extracto:
Jun 17, 2009 — The Federal Circuit found that the right to have made is inherent in the right to make based on its interpretation of Utah contractual law, the law of the state where the case was brought, after considering a Court of Claims case, Carey v. United States, 326 F.



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 2 hrs (2021-02-12 04:29:30 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Recuerda que inicialmente no había contexto. Hubo que buscar dicho contexto.
“License to make” includes an inherent right to “have made”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that a license to make a patented article includes an inherent right to have a third party make the article absent express language to the contrary. CoreBrace LLC v. Star Seismic LLC, Case No. 08-1502 (Fed. Cir., May 22, 2009) (Lourie, J.).
CoreBrace owns a patent with claims directed to a brace used in the fabrication of earthquake-resistant steel-framed buildings. Star Seismic (Star) received a non-exclusive license to the patent to “make, use and sell” licensed products. The license also stated that Star cold not “assign, sublicense, or otherwise transfer” its rights to any party except an affiliated, parent or subsidiary company. CoreBrace also reserved “all rights not expressly granted to [Star].” However, the agreement gave Star ownership for any technological improvements “by a third party whose services have been contracted by [Star].”
CoreBrace found out that Star used third-party contractors to make the licensed products, which Star would subsequently use. CoreBrace terminated the license and then sued for patent infringement and breach of the agreement.
Star moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim. In granting Star’s motion, the district court reasoned that a patent licensee’s right to “make” an article includes the right to have others do the work connected with the product. CoreBrace appealed.
One of CoreBrace’s arguments was that it retained the “have made” rights, which were not expressly granted and, therefore, retained by CoreBrace under the terms of the license.
Relying on the Court of Claims decision in Carey, the Court held that the right to “make, use, and sell” a product inherently includes the right to have the product made by a third party, absent a clear indication of intent to the contrary. The Court found that Carey held that “a license to produce, use and sell ‘is not restricted to production by the licensee personally or use by him personally or sales by him personally....
In reviewing the terms of the agreement, the Court failed to find any express language limiting the “have made” right.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3f324999-2658...

Selected response from:

Marcelo Viera
Uruguay
Local time: 08:44
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
5han adquirido derechos [de patente]
Jose Marino
4han logrado derechos / han hecho derechos
Patrícia Backes
4 -1derecho a delegar la fabricación
Marcelo Viera


Discussion entries: 5





  

Answers


3 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
han logrado derechos / han hecho derechos


Explanation:
they have made rights in this field
han hecho derechos en este campo


Patrícia Backes
Brazil
Local time: 08:44
Native speaker of: Native in PortuguesePortuguese

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Nelson Soares
2 days 2 hrs

disagree  Marcelo Viera: Estoy en desacuerdo en base a las referencias posteadas en mi respuesta
2 days 23 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

4 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
han adquirido derechos [de patente]


Explanation:
Tratándose de patentes, seguramente se tratará de la adquisición de derechos de patente: https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1ASUM_enES870ES870&sxsrf...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 4 hrs (2021-02-11 05:38:14 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

https://articulospm.wordpress.com/2014/09/26/gestionando-pro...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 4 hrs (2021-02-11 05:38:49 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

https://lumiformapp.com/es/plantillas/auditoria-de-cumplimie...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 4 hrs (2021-02-11 05:39:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

https://www.fabricantes-maquinaria-industrial.es/proyectos/

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 4 hrs (2021-02-11 05:41:28 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

¡Mil disculpas! Hice un "copy and paste" de los 3 últimos enlaces por error. Saludos.

Jose Marino
Spain
Local time: 12:44
Native speaker of: Native in SpanishSpanish

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Antonella Perazzoni
8 hrs
  -> ¡Gracias!

disagree  Marcelo Viera: Las referencias publicadas indican que se refiere al derecho a encargar a un tercero la fabricación de un producto del que se es licenciatario
1 day 20 hrs
  -> pues por lo tanto, me das toda la razón.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

15 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): -1
derecho a delegar la fabricación


Explanation:
CoreBrace found out that Star used third-party contractors to make the licensed products, which Star would subsequently use. CoreBrace terminated the license and then sued for patent infringement and breach of the agreement.

Star moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim. In granting Star’s motion, the district court reasoned that a patent licensee’s right to “make” an article includes the right to have others do the work connected with the product. CoreBrace appealed.
One of CoreBrace’s arguments was that it retained the “have made” rights, which were not expressly granted and, therefore, retained by CoreBrace under the terms of the license.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 18:46:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

n general, a "have made" right, which is derived from the term "to make" set forth in 35 U.S.C. $ 271(a), permits a licensee to have an unlicensed third party make a licensed product for the licensee. There are no magic words to grant a licensee "have made” rights.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 18:50:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Have Made Rights. The licenses in Section 3.1 above shall include the right to have contract manufacturers and foundries manufacture Lumentum Licensed Products for any member of the Lumentum Group (including private label or OEM versions of such products) solely within the Lumentum Field, and are not intended to include foundry or contract manufacturing activities that any member of the Lumentum Group may undertake on behalf of Third Parties, whether directly or indirectly.
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/have-made-rights

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2021-02-10 19:00:32 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Have Made Rights. The licenses granted to HBIO in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 above shall include the right to have Third Parties manufacture and distribute products of HBIO, subject to the distribution rights granted to HART under the Product Distribution Agreement.
(en el sitio lawinsider hay más ejemplos que brindan contexto)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2021-02-11 01:02:41 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

La estructura es similar a la siguiente:
I will have my hair cut tomorrow.

Licensees have the right to have "the product" made by a Third Party
"derecho de mandarlo a hacer" (según especificaciones) por un tercero pero dada la formalidad de un texto legal, la traducción literal queda muy "pobre".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 24 mins (2021-02-11 01:57:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Muy interesante el artículo: "The inherency of the patent right to have made" article que menciona el caso CoreBrace vs Star que genera jurisprudencia.PDF (2 págiinas)
Se puede descargar de: https://www.jmbm.com/
extracto:
Jun 17, 2009 — The Federal Circuit found that the right to have made is inherent in the right to make based on its interpretation of Utah contractual law, the law of the state where the case was brought, after considering a Court of Claims case, Carey v. United States, 326 F.



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 2 hrs (2021-02-12 04:29:30 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Recuerda que inicialmente no había contexto. Hubo que buscar dicho contexto.
“License to make” includes an inherent right to “have made”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that a license to make a patented article includes an inherent right to have a third party make the article absent express language to the contrary. CoreBrace LLC v. Star Seismic LLC, Case No. 08-1502 (Fed. Cir., May 22, 2009) (Lourie, J.).
CoreBrace owns a patent with claims directed to a brace used in the fabrication of earthquake-resistant steel-framed buildings. Star Seismic (Star) received a non-exclusive license to the patent to “make, use and sell” licensed products. The license also stated that Star cold not “assign, sublicense, or otherwise transfer” its rights to any party except an affiliated, parent or subsidiary company. CoreBrace also reserved “all rights not expressly granted to [Star].” However, the agreement gave Star ownership for any technological improvements “by a third party whose services have been contracted by [Star].”
CoreBrace found out that Star used third-party contractors to make the licensed products, which Star would subsequently use. CoreBrace terminated the license and then sued for patent infringement and breach of the agreement.
Star moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim. In granting Star’s motion, the district court reasoned that a patent licensee’s right to “make” an article includes the right to have others do the work connected with the product. CoreBrace appealed.
One of CoreBrace’s arguments was that it retained the “have made” rights, which were not expressly granted and, therefore, retained by CoreBrace under the terms of the license.
Relying on the Court of Claims decision in Carey, the Court held that the right to “make, use, and sell” a product inherently includes the right to have the product made by a third party, absent a clear indication of intent to the contrary. The Court found that Carey held that “a license to produce, use and sell ‘is not restricted to production by the licensee personally or use by him personally or sales by him personally....
In reviewing the terms of the agreement, the Court failed to find any express language limiting the “have made” right.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3f324999-2658...




    https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3f324999-2658-4c59-b445-98e0b09b603a
Marcelo Viera
Uruguay
Local time: 08:44
Native speaker of: Spanish
PRO pts in category: 4
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  Jose Marino: No hay nada que avale tal cosa.
1 day 11 hrs
  -> Acabo de agregar un fragmento más extenso. Todas las fuentes apuntan en la misma dirección. Por eso pedimos mayor contexto en su momento. Era aventurado responder sin contar con dicho contexto.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)



Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.


See also:
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search