Dear Student, please read the assignment requirements. If the student failed to follow these requirements a ZERO would be issued for failing to follow the grading requirements.
1. Answer these five questions using chapter 8,9, and 10 from your textbook. The students would need to log in to cengage.com enter their email address and default password to access the textbook.
EMAIL: XXXXXXXXXX: Mo.mo1999
2. You need to state the Issue, the rule, the analysis, and the conclusion for each question.
3. The issue part is easy, and nobody misses that, it should be NO LONGER than one sentence, and it would be the same question you are being asked.
4. The rule needs to be identified using the textbook and using cengage.com, you would need to read chapter 8, 9, and 10 to find the rule and you would need to state the page number of the textbook where you found the rule. You also would need to idnetify the rule and relate it to the nature of the problem so you can be able to come up with the analysis. The rule needs to be one paragraph long explaining the rule mentioned in the book after reading chapters 8,9 and 10
5. The analysis needs to discuss the rule using facts. The analysis should be at least one paragraph long.
6. The conclusion needs to be ONE sentence long and it answers the questions.
**ANY FAILING TO FOLLOW THESE REQUIRNMENTS WOULD RESULT IN A 0% FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT **
1. Trademark Infringement. Nike, Inc., manufactures and markets footwear, apparel, andrelated accessories. To identify its products, Nike uses the word Nike and/or a swooshdesign as its trademarks. Nike spends millions advertising the trademarks. Sales revenuesfor items bearing the trademarks are in the billions. Nike began using the phrase Just Do Itin 1989 as a slogan for its sweatshirts, T-shirts, caps, and other accessories. Sales revenuesfor Just Do It items generate millions of dollars. Nike, the swoosh design, and Just Do It havegained widespread public acceptance and recognition. Michael Lane is a commercial artstudent at a prestigious university. As a summer project, he and his four college friends,Jerry, Logan, Sue and Michelle, decided to market his first name, Mike, as a takeoff on theNike logo. They named their project Just Did It Enterprises and concentrated on marketingT-shirts and sweatshirts to members of the general public with the given (first) name ofMichael. They also mailed brochures to college athletes and celebrities named Michael.Sales were entirely by mail order. Approximately two-thirds of those purchasing the shirtswere named Mike. Lane believed that the other third probably bought a T-shirt for a friend,relative, or loved one named Mike. Ultimately, the project lost money. Nike sued Lane andall of his friends for trademark infringement. Lane and his friends argued that the wordplay was humorous and was just a parody. Should the court rule that Nike’s trademark hadbeen infringed? Explain.2. Fair Use Doctrine. The trademark suit eventually settled and the group of friendsgraduated from college and moved on with their lives. Immediately after graduation, JerryUver, one of the friends, left the US for two years to work as an aid worker for a nongovernmental organization (NGO) doing relief work in third world countries. After hereturned back to the United States, he told his family he would leave Church of the Life’sWay, a popular religious sect that his entire family belonged to. His family disowned him,but he was determined to expose the sect leader, R.M. Umber, who was a vindictive andprofoundly disturbed man. Jerry spent the next several years investigating, and thenwriting a book about Umber and the Church. Jerry’s purpose was to expose what hebelieved was the pernicious nature of the Church and the deceit upon which its teachingswere based. Approximately 25 percent of Jerry’s book consisted of quotations fromUmber’s published works on the Church, its doctrines and teachings. When ArrowPublications, which held exclusive copyright rights in all of Umber’s works, learned thatSeground Publish Group planned to publish Jerry’s book, it sued Seground Publish Groupfor copyright infringement. Seground Publishing claimed that Jerry’s use of Umber’s workswas a fair use of the copyrighted materials. Discuss the factors of the fair use doctrine thatthe court must consider in making its decision? What will its decision be?3. Criminal Intent. Logan, another friend from college, failed to pay the federalgovernment the total amount of income tax he owed from a small business he opened a fewyears ago. Attempts by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to collect the tax provedfruitless. Therefore, the IRS obtained (through lawful means) a tax lien on Logan’s personalproperty, which included his truck. One night, Logan’s girlfriend, upon hearing the truck’smotor, awakened her sleeping boyfriend. Wielding a shotgun, Logan went to his front doorand told the two men who were attempting to take his truck to stop. Logan claimed that hedid not know the two men were IRS agents. Subsequently, the federal government indictedLogan for obstructing justice. Can Logan be held criminally liable if he did not know thatthe men were IRS agents performing their duty?4. Criminal Act. Sue’s life after college did not go as everyone expected. She had alwaysbeen into fashion and loved shopping. That love of shopping soon turned into an addiction.One day, she went to a department store, spent some time shopping, and eventually filled alarge, empty chandelier box with approximately $900 worth of clothing. When she went tothe check-out counter, the cashier indicated that he wanted to look inside the box beforeaccepting Sue’s payment for the chandelier. Sue then pushed the cart back into the isles anddeparted from the premises. Sue was convicted of grand larceny by the trial court. Onappeal, Sue argued that because she had not actually removed any goods from the store,she had not committed larceny. Is she correct? Did Sue performed the criminal act ofunlawfully removing the goods?
5. Embezzlement. It seems like none of Michael Lane’s friends was spared frommisfortunate after their involvement in the trademark infringement lawsuit. Michelle wasno exception. As a single mother, she worked for a small furniture store in herneighborhood. She was one of only five employees. She did everything from sales, toaccount payable and receivables, payroll, and other administrative duties. Last fall, herinfant son went to the ER for what turned out to be a minor nursemaid’s elbow. But thehospital visit and examination by two doctors resulted in a $6,000 bill not covered by herinsurance for various reasons. Desperate for money to pay the medical bill, Michelledecided to borrow money from the furniture store with the intent to pay it back as soon asshe could. She then transferred funds from the store’s account to a fictitious vendor bankaccount. She made a total of two transfers. To her disbelief, no one discovered the transfers,and within 3 months, she was to repay the full amount back. She then shut down the fakeaccount. It was only five months later that the fund transfers were discovered by the ownerof the store. The owner then fired Michelle and sued her for embezzlement. Michelleargued she did not steal anything – that she merely borrowed the funds, all of which werecompletely repaid. Would the court agree with her?