A Silently-Raging Bull

A recent US Supreme Court decision highlights a defence that's raised from time to time in intellectual property (IP) matters, but rarely succeeds. It's the defence of delay, something that's referred to by various names, including 'acquiescence', 'estoppel'  and 'laches'. It relates to a situation where the owner of the IP right – usually a copyright or a trade mark – tries to enforce its right after a lengthy delay, and the party being sued claims that the IP owner has, because of the long delay and the impression that this has created, effectively foregone its right. The reason why acquiescence is raised rather than prescription is because in IP cases the infringement is often of an ongoing nature.