1- Jenni works for Maple Sales. Maple Sales competes directly with Oak Sales in
ID: 384482 • Letter: 1
Question
1- Jenni works for Maple Sales. Maple Sales competes directly with Oak Sales in the flooring business in Wisconsin. Maple engineers developed a new process to manufacture laminate flooring for installation into customer homes. In 2009, the engineers had developed a new production layout and an innovative formula for reducing the production cost of the flooring by 45%. Maple Sales was able to start production in March 2010 and lower its prices. As a result, Maple Sales achieved large increases in its sales and market share.
Six months later, Oak Sales attorneys contacted Jenni and notified her that Oak Sales was filing an injunction to stop Maple Sales from using the new production process and formula. They claim Maple Sales misappropriated the secret formula for the flooring from Oak Sales. The attorneys indicate Oak Sales employees started work on the process in 2005 and perfected the method in 2009. It was now poised to begin production in 2011. They claim the Maple Sales production method infringes on the Oak Sales trade secret. Oak Sales developed the process first, kept all information about the new process secret and chemical analysis indicates Maple Sales’ new product is nearly the same as the Oak Sales product. Oak Sales insists it is entitled to an injunction and damages. Please discuss these claims.
2- Angela worked for Malcoom Grocery as an employee for 18 years. Her husband is a deputy sheriff. Last Saturday night, Angela's husband was out on a patrol when he stopped a car that was weaving. The car's driver was the wife of Angela's boss, Mr. Malcoom. Ms Malcoom was charged with driving under the influence. The next Monday, Mr. Malcoom summoned Angela into his office and simply said, "I am arresting your work here, you are fired. Get your check and go."
Angela now sues Malcoom Grocery for discrimination and an unlawful discharge. Please discuss her legal claim.
3 - Millard belongs to the Western Chapter of the Associated Coin Dealers of Southern North Dakota (ACDSND). He recently proposed that the organization adopt an "Industry Code of Conduct" for the ACDSND members.
The code is to "maintain high ethical conduct"; "avoid misleading valuation of coins"; "pledge to fight and prevent fraud on customers who purchase coins or sell coins from our members"; and to "eliminate fraud by adopting a standard pricing list for the sales or purchase of coins by our members."
Does this plan expose the organization and its members to any potential antitrust or consumer protection liability?
4- Amos Mfrg. is a manufacturer of tools used in business, construction and consumers. The recession has reduced sales of its traditional products such as hammers, wrenches and other tools. The company employs two employees who are inventors. The two developed a couple of chemical solvents that will clean tools, parts and machinery using a liquid chemical wash and dry chemical powder that avoids the liquid waste.
The company has decided to produce the two products and market them to industry and ultimately consumers. They plan to keep the chemical mixtures secret and believe they may successfully do so without competitors stealing the formula. They have tested the products for many types of cleaning applications. They are not chemists and this would be the company's first attempt to enter the chemicals market.
Please advise them if they should consider a patent and any other registration of the product for ultimate sale.
Explanation / Answer
Intellectual property right s are the rights given to a person or organization by the respective authorities for prohibiting others to copy the work. In case of anyone found doing so, they may be punished financially and other respective charges maybe vested on them.
As per the intellectual property rights a person or organization cannot falsely use the work done (research and intellectual knowledge). Doing so will make him defaulter for violating the for infringement of the IPR of an individual.
In this case it is very clear that Oak sales did not get any patent or copyrighted their work. It is quite possible that Maple company may have invented the formula on their own and it is also possible they must have got the work of Oak sale by wrong means. Anything is possible.
However, Oak sales can still file a case and challenge Maple sale to prove the genuineness of their work.
In the court if Oak sales may be able to prove that Maple sales did not invented the formula and it was their work (can be proved by showing their work in court). The court can in this case order an investigation to find which work is original or if both the ways are different. If after the investigation Maple turns out to be guilty, the court may order to pay the amount of loss to oak sales.
Note: As per chegg policy only one question can be answered at a time.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.