Defendant had sold US-manufactured BOSE home theater systems in the UK. Bose sued in the UK, the parties signed a world-wide settlement agreement. Defendant allegedly continued to sell in Australia. Bose sues in Boston. Defendant makes some (imho) not well-taken arguments against the enforceability of the agreement. Defendant also argues that the $50k per incident liquidated damage clause was unconscionable. 1st Circ: $50k is proportionate to the damages from an infringing sale of a $6500 product, when considering legal fees, etc.

Interesting question: defendant apparently purchased the items in the US, and shipped to Australia. Which country’s trademark laws should apply?

Decision here.

Short note on the extraterritorial effect of the Lanham Act here.

43(b)log comment here.