In breach of the agreement, PPX granted licences to masters not in Sch A.

That was ‘such sum as might reasonably have been demanded’ by the estate ‘as a quid pro quo for agreeing to permit the two licences into which PPX entered in breach of the settlement agreement’.

He said there was an element of artificiality, because permission for the licences may never have been given, but this directed ‘the court’s attention to the commercial value of the right infringed’ and the court could ‘assess the sum payable by reference to the fees that might in other contexts be demanded and paid between willing parties.’ The Hendrix vs Chalpin arguing looked as if it would are resolved in 1973 by method of an edict in the litigation of PPX Enterprises, Inc. v. Davis.

Enterprises abandoned all claims against the defendants and in agreement to surrender alternative master recordings then in its possession.

Judgment was entered in favor of the defendants and against Enterprises within the quantity of fifty thousand pounds, and Chalpin in person warranted payment of that add.