If you plan to practice as a clinical psychologist as a service provider, you must be licensed to do so.This is true in every state, province, and territory of the United States and Canada.In several states, you may not legally use the title of “psychologist” without a license to practice psychology.A psychology license is required by nearly every third-party payer for reimbursement of services and is a requisite for employment for most positions at major agencies that employ psychologists. The psychology license represents the first essential requirement for independent practice.You do not become a practicing psychologist when you receive your doctorate; you become one when you obtain your license.This process has changed significantly in noticeable ways in the twenty years since this chapter was first written for the first edition of this book.The current process and latest changes, along with recommendations and strategies, are reviewed.

Chapter 6 covers some of the fundamental building blocks of a licensing agreement, namely the license grant and scope (Spindelfabrik v. Schubert & Salzer): how are licensed rights identified -- by enumeration or through portfolio definitions? How are corporate affiliates treated by the licensor and the licensee? What is know-how licensing? How to deal with licenses of future rights? How should the licensed territory be defined? How can the field of use be limited? How do have-made and “foundry” rights work (Cyrix v. Intel)? How do technological changes affect the field of use (Boosey & Hawkes v. DIsney)? How should sublicensing be addressed (Rhone-Poulenc v. DeKalb)?

Chapter 7 considers the rationale and policy behind the granting of exclusive licenses. It then explores the special obligations imposed on both licensors and licensees when exclusive licenses are granted. Licensor duties include refraining from granting competing licenses in the field (Duncan v. Royal Tops), the exercise of licensor reserved rights (Kepner-Tregoe v. Vroom), and the duty to maintain and enforce licensed IP. The exclusive licensee’s obligations include a duty to exploit the licensed IP, possibly in accordance with a schedule of milestones (Wood v. Duff Gordon; Permanence v. Kennametal).