A fraternity was involved in litigation in 1969 regarding use of its various indicia, and resolved the matter signing a consent agreement which bars it from asserting rights against, inter alia, “any jewelry or insignia goods manufacturer.”    Now the frat has a trademark dispute with a manufactuer, who was not involved in the 1969 dispute, but argues that it is protected by the language in the 1969 agreement.  Affirming a lower court rejection of that argument, the Eighth Circuit held that in general, consent agreements do not create rights in parties not bound by the agreement, and there was no extrinsic evience in this case that the drafters of the 1969 agreement had intended to create such rights here.  For the text of this decision, use Sigma Chi as a search term in the Eighth Circuit’s full text search engine.  Pure Country v. Sigma Chi, 02-1944 (8th Cir. Nov 27, 2002),