Scheiber v. Dolby Laboratories, Inc.

293 F.3d 1014 (2002)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
S
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Scheiber v. Dolby Laboratories, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
293 F.3d 1014 (2002)

Facts

Scheiber (plaintiff) owned both United States and Canadian patents on the “surround sound” audio system. Scheiber sued Dolby Laboratories, Inc. (Dolby) (defendant) for infringement of the patents. As part of the settlement, Scheiber agreed to license the patents to Dolby pursuant to a royalty agreement. The United States patents for the system were set to expire in May 1993, while the remaining Canadian patents had expiration dates of September 1995. Dolby agreed to pay royalties on all of the patents, including the United States patents, through the Canadian expiration date in exchange for lower royalty fees, which Dolby felt would be easier to pass on to Dolby’s sub-licensees without pushback. Dolby later withheld royalty payments. Scheiber sued Dolby to enforce the licensing agreement. Dolby contended that, based on Brulotte v. Thys, Co. 379 U.S. 29 (1964), the agreement to pay post-expiration royalty payments was unenforceable.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Intellectual Property
Patent

Key Terms