Business Law: Intellectual Property Assignment, Case Study Example

1. Max plots a new Batman adventure and carefully and skillfully imitates the art of DC Comics to create an authentic-looking Batman comic. Max is not affiliated with the owners of the copyright to Batman. Can Max publish the comic without infringing on the owners’ copyright? Why or why not?

Max had the responsibility to conduct either a manual if done before 1978 or a computer search or registration for copyright to the Batman comic before commencing imitating the work of art that DC Comics owned legally. Max cannot claim the copyright of DC Comics not matter how much he changes the art work. Reproducing and publishing copyrighted material is considering an infringement and  is not ‘fair use’ of the product therefore Max can be sued for reproducing the copyrighted material and  required to pay substantial damaged for infringing the rights of DC Comics.

2. College Copy Shop (CCS) compiles, copies, and sells reading materials to students on the instructions of their professors, who indicate which parts of which publications should be included. These include texts published by Deep Topics, Inc. CCS does not obtain the permission of Deep Topics, or any of the other original publishers of the copied materials, and does not pay royalties on the sales of the compilations. Deep Topics and others file a suit against CCS, alleging infringement of the plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights. Which type of intellectual property is involved in this situation? What is CCS’s likely defense? How is a court most likely to rule? Explain.

Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentage of a work. Whether a particular use qualifies as fair use depends on all the circumstances. As long as Deep Topics includes only the consented materials of the professors according to the ‘fair use doctrine statute’ and nothing else they do not need the consent of CCS. If they go beyond publishing that information according to the ‘fair use doctrine’ they will be in infringement of the copyrights of CCS and can be sued in a court of law for infringement of copyrights of CCS. CCS’s likely affirmative defense will be they were well within the ‘fair use doctrine’ and had permission of the professors and used only what the professors’ granted use of. The court is most likely to rule in Deep Topic’s favor because of this doctrine and having consent of the professors’.

3. For five years, baby-food makers Baby-One Corporation and Baby-B-Mine, Inc. have both used the phrase “Tastes Good” on their labels. Baby-One files a suit against Baby-B-Mine, claiming trademark infringement. Baby-B-Mine argues that the phrase is not generally associated with any particular firm, pointing to other companies that use the same phrase on their labels. In whose favor is the court most likely to rule, and why?

If no one actually owns the copyright of the phrase there is no infringement until one of the company buys the legal rights to the phrase. An example is that of the New Orleans Saints and the NFL claiming the “Who Dat!!” If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. 1114, 1125. When a court determines if there has been product infringement four factors will be considered (1) the strength of the mark (2) the similarity of the mark (3) the proximity of the goods and (4) and the evidence of the actual confusion that arises as distinguished in Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961).  The court is most likely to rule there has been no infringement because no one owned the copyright.

4. Hawk Corporation begins manufacturing and selling motorcycles in 1995 under the mark “Hawk.” Ten years later, Hawk.com, Inc., different company selling medical equipment and supplies, begins to use “Hawk” as part of its URL and registers it as a domain name. Can Hawk Corporation stop Hawk.com’s use of “hawk”? If so, what must the motorcycle-maker show?

Hawk, the original owner of the motorcycles must show they were the legal owners of the name or copyrighters of the name “Hawk” therefore owned the domain rights to the name. The company that purchases the rights to the domain name usually has priority over the domain name but the company with the original owner of the company name can fight for the domain name. This involves trademark law and is a very slow process. In response to intense lobbying from trademark owners and famous individuals, Congress passed the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in November of 1999. This act made it easier for individuals and companies to take over domain names that are confusingly similar to their names or valid trademarks. To do so, however, they must establish that the domain name holder acted in bad faith.