代做BA457 Final Exam Practice Questions

BA457 Final Exam Practice Questions:

(Note: On the final exam, as on prior exams, a question could include multiple issues.)

Question 1: {trademark}

Lladro Exportadora, a Spanish corporation, registered the Lladro trademark for its porcelain in Spain. Several years later, Weil Ceramics & Glass, Lladro’s wholly-owned subsidiary in the United States, purchased from Lladro the right to use Lladro’s trademark for porcelain sold in the United States. Weil registered the Lladro trademark in the U.S. and became the exclusive distributor of Lladro porcelain in the United States. Later, Weil discovered that Jalyn Corporation was importing and selling Lladro porcelain in the United States under the Lladro trademark.

Issue: If Weil protests these sales, will the U.S. Customs Service prohibit the imports?

Rule(s):

Outcome:

Rationale:

[Hint: See Chapter 13, “gray market” imports

Study note: notice the relationship in this hypothetical between Weil and Lladro. How may that affect the analysis?]

Question 2: {patent}

[Note: I initially considered this question in case we also got to antitrust, which we did not. So please ignore such issues about exclusivity, integration, and pricing discrimination (ch.14/Sherman Act/Clayton Act/Robinson-Patman Act) and focus on chapter 13 patent principles as stated in the issue.]

Barnes patented a line of virtual reality headsets which it offered for sale only through independent retail dealers at physical locations in various U.S. cities. This permitted Barnes to maintain a dual pricing system with high prices in the Northeastern and Western states and much lower prices in the Midwest and South. Barnes’ contracts with the dealers in the Midwest and South include strict maximum resale pricing requirements, territorial restrictions and prohibit all internet sales. After the headsets’ popularity began to grow, Barnes’ dealers in the Eastern and Western states complained that they were being undercut by online sales. Barnes then discovered that Applegate, an Ohio corporation unaffiliated with Barnes, had been purchasing lower-priced headsets from Midwest dealers and reselling them online throughout the country. Barnes sued Applegate for patent infringement.

Issue: Will Barnes win its patent infringement lawsuit? [Hint: you could phrase this another way, such as--can Barnes prohibit Applegate from re-selling the headsets?]

Rule(s):

Outcome:

Rationale:

[Hint: See chapter 13 on patent]

Bonus: while this patent issue does not address extraterritorial enforcement,

Question 3: {copyright}

Indiana University regularly sells a line of sweatshirts that prominently display the “IU” logo. The university owns the copyright on clothing that displays the IU logo. University officials recently discovered that counterfeit IU sweatshirts were being sold at a kiosk in one of the corridors of a local shopping mall. Despite warning both the mall owner—Maplewood—and the  kiosk operator of its copyright claims, the sales of the counterfeit sweatshirts persisted. Although the mall lease gave Maplewood the right to inspect merchandise sold by its tenants and the right to evict tenants who violated its rules, Maplewood refused to evict the kiosk operator.

Issue: Are the kiosk operator or Maplewood Mall likely to be liable to the university?

Rule(s):

Outcomes:

Rationale:

“Bonus” issue on copyrights:

After paying a fee, subscribers can access sexually explicit photographs on a computer bulletin board service operated by Warren. Subscribers can earn credits for further access by uploading images onto the service. It was later discovered that numerous photographs uploaded onto the service were photographs owned by Playboy magazine. Will Warren be liable for copyright infringement?

Question 4: {trade secret}

Matthews Corporation, a company doing business in the United States, developed a secret process that enabled it to produce widgets at a higher quality and for a lower cost than its competitors. Accordingly, the company produced its widgets in a closed facility protected by a fence and tight security measures. Despite the security measures, Cornwell was able to sneak into the factory one evening and take photographs of the secret process.

Issue: If Matthews sues Cornwell for misappropriation of its trade secret in a U.S. court, would it likely be successful? [Note: for such a question you should define when a company enjoys trade  secret protection.]

Rule(s):

Outcome:

Rationale:

Question 5:

A report funded by the U.S. Department of Labor’s International Development Fund and developed by the Payson Center for International Development at Tulane University finds that upwards of half of lithium-mining operations in Africa and Asia employ “the worst forms of child labor.” Lithium is a critical component of batteries used in cell phones, such as those manufactured by Pineapple, Inc.

Pineapple, Inc. is a large consumer electronics multinational corporation, which prides itself on its plain, yellow packaging of its phone products. Charles wants to sue Pineapple for not publishing on its packages that “the worst forms of child labor exist in Pineapple’s supply chains.” Charles (as a class action representative) bring a suit in federal court in California (in the Ninth Circuit) under California’s consumer protection statutes such as the Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law.

Issue: Will Charles’s lawsuit likely succeed to enjoin Pineapple to print such labels on their packaging?

Rule(s):

Outcome:

Rationale: