COMM400 Case Study #2 Abstract I chose the case of New Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing, Inc. This case involves issues of the Lanham Trademark Act of 1946, trademark infringement, and the restraints that can legally be enforced if the trademark’s owner claims it has been used inappropriately. Although the First Amendment protects unauthorized trademark usage in comedic, parodied or critical usage situations, it does not guarantee that trademark usage will never be used without the owner’s consent, especially for the purpose of newsgathering. The core issue in this case is whether or not trademark infringement actually happened. In order for the court to determine whether or not a trademark has been infringed, considerations such as the “strength of marks, the similarity in appearance of the products, the meaning of the marks, the kinds of goods in question,, and the intention of defendant using the mark” must be considered (2012).
Abstract Insider trading is defined as "insiders trading on shares of a company for which they have privileged 'material' information not available to the 'public', and for which they seek to gain pecuniary or other benefits" . Past literature has provided numerous studies discussing the application of ethics to insider trading and to what extend one can consider such a practise as moral or immoral. Engelen and Liedekerke make a clear distinction between insider trading and market manipulation that they define as where private information is used in order to make a share value shift from its fundamental value and therefore implies market inefficiency. Under their definition insider trading, on the other hand, can hardly be qualified as immoral and increase market efficiency. The discussion about insider trading therefore leads to the much wider issue of morality Vs legality.
Recently, Wiretime ran an advertisement in a well-known industry magazine blasting BUGusa by stating that their products are inferior and have a very limited lifespan. This would be classified as an intentional tort because these statements “have the potential to impact business relationships and operations” (Melvin, 2011). This particular case would be listed as defamation and categorized further as trade libel. To be considered trade libel the “statement needs to be (1) a clear and specific reference to the disparaged party or product (e.g., using the actual brand name of the product), (2) made with either knowledge that the statement was false or reckless disregard for the truth, and (3) communicated to a third party (similar to defamation)” (Melvin, 2011). References Melvin, S. P. (2011).
BUSN 513 Case Study 2 Case Study 2 – SK Hynix 1. Within the SK Hynix case, three arguments – property, fair competition and confidentiality – come into play. The first argument is that trade secrets are property and would have belonged to Toshiba/Sandisk as intellectual property; that the research data on the cutting edge NAND-type flash memory was a direct result of Toshiba’s labor and thus belonged to the company. Boatright clarifies further in the text by saying, “it would be wrong for a worker in the factory to disclose the details of a manufacturing process to a competitor, especially if the employee had been sworn to secrecy”; however, Boatright also says that ownership of a trade secret doesn’t confer a right to exclusive use but only the right to have the secret wrongfully acquired by others. In the case of Wexler vs Greenberg, we found that the owner of a trade secret is protected against the use of the information by others when it is wrongfully obtained by impermissible means (like theft).
3.Issue Is the appropriation of someone's identity without consent considered an invasion of the right to privacy? 4.Holding Yes. The United States Court of Appeals of the ninth circuit ruled that even though Vanna White's name or exact likeness wasn't used in Samsung Electronics, Inc's advertisement, the company left little doubt regarding the identity of the celebrity it was trying to and intended to make profits from the advertisement without the permission of Vanna White herself. Upheld. 5.Court's Reasoning A.
Making false claims about your product and knowingly advertising it, is immoral. Deceptive advertising is the use of false or misleading statements in advertising. This violates the respect principle. As advertising has the potential to persuade people into purchases that they might otherwise avoid. The owner is treating the consumer as a means only and not as end in themselves.
This test was examined in the Carparo Industries Plc. v Dickman case. The defendant had an account audited that didn’t reflect a previous loss and debts in the bookkeeping records, instead, profits, putting the claimants in a belief that, the company in question is worth investing in. Afterwards, the claimants found out the audited account didn’t reflect exactly the true previous and current status of the company financial dilemma. Based on the principles of the three-part-fold, the House of Lords ruled against the claimant that: the defendant owes no duty of care to the claimant in such circumstances.
First, they say that it was no intention that brings to the legally binding agreement. But the court held that there was legal intention because it was a commercial transaction and intention was presumed. Another argue by the company said that the ad was just an invitation to treat (not a contract). But the court held that a newspaper advertisement was generally offers to treat, which in other word could be said specifically as an offer. Then, the company also argue that Mrs. Carlill did not make an acceptance or agreement to the offer, as one of a contract element.
Seminar 3 Negligent Misstatement (Summative) Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1963] 2 All ER 575 Whether and under what conditions a person can recover damages for loss suffered by reason of his having relied on an innocent but negligent misrepresentation. Hedley [the appellants] were advertising agency who had made some advertising work for Easipower. Hedley was responsible for any amount which was not paid by Easipower since they have to pay for advertising orders. Later on Hedley became curious about a financial position of Easipower to afford another advertising which Hedley may give them on credit. The bank of Easipower [the defendant] gave a report of Easipowers financial position that they have enough resources for ordinary business proceedings, but stated that the report was given "without responsibility."
Briefly describe the business model and relative strengths & weaknesses of each category of IP intermediaries a) NPEs or patent trolls (e.g. Acacia) BM: acquiring patents and asserting the corresponding intellectual property rights by seeking licensing revenues from companies, often through litigation or the threat of litigation. Their strategy often consists of waiting until a company had made large investments in certain technology before asserting their claims. Obtaining patents: sometimes their own inventions, but mostly acquiring patents from e.g. bankrupt companies.