Maybe it’s the end of the year, beginning of the new. I’m not sure but I am sure I’d rather not have to write anything more about Martha Stewart.<\/p>\n
But I did start it<\/a>, didn’t I\u00a0\u2014 and mentioned it not once but twice<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 so I feel I can’t leave lawsuit stories dangling. So, here is this particular bit of news: Martha Stewart Living and Macy\u2019s Settle Contract Dispute – NYTimes.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n Just to remind you, the article begins:<\/p>\n Macy\u2019s and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia have ended their legal battle over whether J.\u2009C. Penney had the right to sell certain Martha Stewart branded housewares.<\/em><\/p>\n On Thursday, Macy\u2019s and Martha Stewart announced that they had settled the breach-of-contract case, saying the details were confidential and not material to either company. They said their partnership would continue, but declined to comment further. <\/em><\/p>\n Macy\u2019s larger suit against J.\u2009C. Penney still remains. Macy\u2019s said the settlement with Martha Stewart Living would not affect that case. <\/em><\/p>\n So it’s another<\/em> “details were confidential” settlement. And they “declined to comment further.” My interpretation: neither side got anything much. Macy’s still feels she’s a valuable partner and Stewart still feels that her deal with Macy’s is a good one.<\/p>\n But if you read the second post link, you’ll see that the judge ordered them to settle “or else.” So the big winner here is the judge. And that’s what judges do in cases like this: they say “settle or else.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Maybe it’s the end of the year, beginning of the new. I’m not sure but I am sure I’d rather not have to write anything more about Martha Stewart. But I did start it, didn’t I\u00a0\u2014 and mentioned it not … Continue reading