Opinion ID: 153734
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Webb's other international licenses

Text: 56 The district court also relied on the fact that Webb's foreign licenses define the territorial limitations of each particular license. For example, a license between Webb and an Italian corporation provides that Webb grants a license to sell Webb products in the Territory. The agreement further defines the territory to mean Italy, Ethiopia, Somalia, Spain, Portugal, and several other listed nations. Based on evidence of numerous licenses with similar language and territorial definitions, the court concluded that Webb knew how to define the geographical territory and limit the license grant to the geographical scope of the defined territory. Webb had done so explicitly in each of the license agreements it had entered into with companies in foreign countries as part of its global licensing program. Mid-West Conveyor Co., Inc. v. Jervis B. Webb Co., 877 F.Supp. 552, 560 (D.Kan.1995). Webb responds that its territorial definitions in those licenses were not intended to limit the scope of the particular license agreement to certain nations, but rather to expand it by defining the various nations where the licenses could be used. Webb argues that the lack of any reference to foreign countries in the License Agreement further shows that Webb did not intend to expand the license to any countries outside the United States and Canada. 57 Although once again this evidence is not conclusive, it does provide some support for the district court's factual conclusion that the parties intended an unlimited geographical scope when they entered into the Agreement in question. 11