Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Reflection on breach of confidentiality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Reflection on breach of confidentiality
Issue:
The issue here is about the copyright use of an intangible idea that was also in some tangible forms and what is all covered in the copyright law. Are the plaintiff’s ideas being copyrighted by Taco Bell, after the breach of an implied-in-fact contract? Within the copyright laws, can the plaintiff’s claim be valid? Why weren’t some of Wrench’s claims preempted under the federal copyright law? For this case, what is protected under copyright law and why are some of the appellant’s claims not preempted by federal copyright law? Also, which claims were not preempted? Wrench LLC, the plaintiff, and Taco Bell Corp, the defendant, had an implied contract when it came to the use of the plaintiff’s ideas. Wrench sues on the fact of claiming
…show more content…
The case was brought up by the plaintiff, Wrench LLC. The appellants were two Michigan men named Thomas Rinks and Joseph Shields, who made a cartoon character “Psycho Chihuahua”, that character was then marketed, promoted, as well as licensed by their company Wrench LLC. Wrench LLC was a completely Michigan owned company with limited liability. The defendants in the case were the well-known company Taco Bell, stationed in California. Wrench had worked on marketing their feisty Chihuahua to Taco Bell in hopes that they would use it in their brand and be the face of Taco …show more content…
Wrench sent back many forms of marketing strategies back to Alfaro. By that action, the use of the Chihuahua in alliance with Taco Bell went from intangible to tangible forms. However, because Alfaro was not part of the marketing team, he had to go through many hoops. Those hoops involved trying to achieve endorsements from the higher up executives first that wasn’t in marketing, and then getting marketing to like the idea later. Once he had accomplished his promotion to non-marketing members, he talked to the vice president of brand management and the person in charge of outside advertising agency. Alfaro also did focus groups to obtain the reactions that such a campaign with the work that Rink and Shield sent
In Laduzinski v. Alvarez & Marsal Taxand LLC, plaintiff was looking for a job with defendant, Alvarez & Marsal Taxand LLC. Plaintiff, Laduzinski, claimed that he was lured away from his job under false pretenses since defendants hired him to get access to his contacts. Nine months later, after plaintiff had given all his contacts, the manager of the Alvarez companies fired him because there was no work for him. Laduzinski brought a claim to recover damages for fraud in the inducement.
Had they been able to do so, Chili’s, the principal in the agency relationship, would have been responsible for the tortious conduct of the patron, the agent. (Cheeseman, p.503) The tort remedies that would have been recoverable from Chili’s might have included “medical expenses; lost wages; pain and suffering; emotional distress; and, in some cases, punitive damages.” (Cheeseman, p.503)
At the trial, after Sue calls her witnesses, offers her evidence, and otherwise presents her side of the case, Tom has at least two choices between courses of action. Tom can call his first witness. What else might he do? (See Following a State Court Case.)
Belanger v. Swift Transportation, Inc. is a case concerning the qualified privilege of employers. In this case, Belanger, a former employee of Swift Transportation, sued the company for libel in regard to posting the reason for his termination on a government data website accessible to other potential employers. Swift has a policy of automatic termination if a driver is in an accident, unless it can be proved that it was unpreventable. When Belanger rear ended another vehicle while driving for Swift, the company determined the accident was preventable, while Belanger maintained it was not. Upon his termination, Swift posted on a database website for promoting highway safety that he was fired because he “did not meet the company’s safety standards,” (Melvin, 2015, p. 265), causing Belanger to sue the company.
Case Name: Dyer v. National By-Products, Inc., Supreme Court of Iowa, 1986., 380 N.W.2d 732
UST Inc. is a dominant player in the smokeless tobacco industry. We have been tasked with weighing the cost and benefits of having leverage in their capital structure and to advise the CEO whether or not to go ahead with the recapitalization. After solving for UST’s credit ratings and value given three different stock buyback scenarios, $700 million, $1 billion, and $1.5 billion, we would suggest that UST move forward with the recap at $1 billion.
Wolford General Partnership (WGP) operates plumbing supply business which is also an exclusive supplier for certain stable construction firms. Because of its excellent reputations and services, WGP is able to an extremely profitable entity for the business. WGP uses an accrual method of accounting and has been using June 30 fiscal year for the tax report purpose after its election of §444 since its formation.
Armanino LLP is the largest independent accounting and business consulting firm based in California with revenues of $155 million in 2015. They offer their services to profit and non-profit organizations. Armanino was founded in 1953, and it has nearly 600 employees. The company extended its global services to more than 100 countries through its membership in Moore Stephens International Limited - one of the world’s major accounting and consulting membership organizations. Armanino’s goal is to provide assistance in audit tax, consulting, and technology solutions to companies worldwide. The firm has won awards such as “Best of the Best” in 2015 from Inside Public Accounting,
The main issue with regards to the applicability of S1322(4)(a) to the appointment of Helen was the meaning of the word contravention.
Deere & Company (Deere) has been experiencing a decrease in its profit margins for one of its aftermarket resale products, specifically the gatherer chain, over the past couple of years. Currently, the cost-price ratio is at 80% compared to last year’s 50%. The purchase cost for the gatherer chain has been steadily increasing, while the aftermarket price has been decreasing. Deere has been budgeting its price to match that of a major competitor, which has been causing the decrease. The company’s main supplier of its gatherer chain is Saunders Manufacturing, with which Deere has established a long term relationship. The owner of Saunders has a reputation of being a tough negotiator, and is someone who is known for not willing to share financial information about the company. However, the U.S. Department of Commerce has provided financial estimates in Saunders’ industry as follows: material spend, 42%; direct labor, 16%; indirect labor, 6%; Overhead, 20%. These percentages are helpful to Deere because they can be used in the negotiation process with Sanders. Since Sanders will not share any specific cost information, Deere is able to use these estimates as a way to justify Sanders reducing its prices. Using these estimates during the negotiations might also incentivize Sanders to provide accurate numbers for its specific manufacturing costs.
On February 4, 2015, attorney Brian Ellison on behalf of petitioner, Gary Debaun and Jeffrey Geldens on behalf of the respondent, the State of Florida stood before the Florida Supreme Court to argue under section 384.24 (2) of the Florida Unlawful acts statute, whether the definition of “sexual intercourse” is limited to sex between a man and a woman or if the statute extends beyond the conduct of penile-vaginal intercourse. Following the review of this case, I will begin by presenting the key facts, followed by a summary of the petitioner and respondent’s cases, and finally my analysis and thoughts concerning the case.
Intellectual property is an incredibly complicated facet of the law. In the United States, we have many laws in place to control and limit profiting from others intellectual property. The issue is not only profiting from others intellectual property, but not purchasing the property from the originator as well. We will discuss why it is important to protect this property as well as why it is tremendously difficult to regulate all these safe guards. “Intellectual Property has the shelf life of a banana.” Bill Gates
This case study is about analyzing a decision-making process that was found in The Night of TV show, episode 4 “ The Art of War”. Where Nasir “ Naz” Khan, the main character in the show is having a deal plea in a case where all evidence is against him. Here, Naz has to choose between taking the plea deal or rejecting it. By accepting the plea deal, Naz his sentence would be reduced to 15 years instead of a lifetime. Indeed, Naz would have to admit to a murder that he did not commit. Another outcome for pleading guilty is that his family, most probably, would not know for sure that he is not a murderer. On the other hand, by rejecting the plea deal, Naz would be taking risks of a lifetime sentence if the jury found him
Case: Pascal Surocco et. al. v. John W. Geary. California Supreme Court, 3 Cal. 69; 58 Am. Dec. 385. (1853)
Because of its intangible nature, and particularly the increase of the digital domain and the internet as a whole, computers and cyber piracy make it easier for people to steal many forms of intellectual property. Due to this major threat, intellectual property rights owners’ should take every single measure to protect their rights. Unless these rights are either sold, exchanged, transferred, or appropriately licensed for use in exchange for a monetary fee, they should be protected at all cost. In order to protect these rights, the federal and states governments have passed numerous laws and statutes to protect intellectual property from misappropriation and infringement. “The source of federal copyright and patent law originates with the Copyright and Patent ...