Contract and Instructor Explanation

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 649
  • Published : March 18, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
Grading Summary|

These are the automatically computed results of your exam. Grades for essay questions, and comments from your instructor, are in the "Details" section below. | Date Taken: | 2/5/2012| Time Spent:| 1 h , 46 min , 19 secs |

Points Received:| 173 / 190  (91.1%) |
|
Question Type:| # Of Questions:| # Correct:|
Short| 2| N/A|
Essay| 4| N/A|
|
|

Grade Details|

 1.| Question :| TCO B. The "public comment" period closes on an OSHA proposed regulation, and your business had filed a public comment against the proposed regulation explaining that the regulation would not fix the problem that OSHA was trying to remedy, that the regulation would cost more than the problem itself, and that the regulation was a tax, not a safety change. List two arguments available to your company that may succeed in overturning the regulation.|

|
 | Student Answer:|  | The proposed regulation would not fix the problem it is intended to remedy and that it would cost more. Also there would be a tax not a safety change, in which OSHA deals with health issues. |  | Instructor Explanation:| Student should list two of these: arbitrary and capricious and/or abuse of discretion, ultra vires, substantial evidence test. (7.5 points for each correctly noted argument.) "Unconstitutional," "public comments period," and "standing" will earn 3 points each for noting these as APA arguments (but they are not correct in this fact pattern).| |

|
 | Points Received:| 8 of 15 |
 |
|
|
 2.| Question :| TCO F. Target sells bags that appear to be Prada, Gucci, and Coach handbags but are priced much lower. The brand labels on the bags say "Pardna," "Guchy," and "Coaching."  The prices are about 65% less than the typical brand-name bags. If the owners of the Prada, Coach, and Gucci names sue Target for palming off or counterfeiting, what would they need to prove to try to win? Do you think they would win? (short answer)|

|
 | Student Answer:|  | Target could be sued by these companies based on it's violation of two business property rights. Trademark and copyright laws would be violated. Based on the definitions found in our text, under trademark property rights, a trademark is a distinctive name,symbol, motto, or design that legally distinguishes or identifies a compay or its products and services and in certain situations prevents others from using the same or similar marks that are "likely to cause confusion". Target is selling bags that appear to be like the named brands which could cause confusion with the consumer. Copyrights are being violated because a copyright under federal law, is right fiven to protect the exlusive use of books, music, and other creative works; in this case the designs made by each company could be copyrighted. The companies could also claim misappropriation which is intentional tort of using someone's name, likeness, voice, or image without permission. |  | Instructor Explanation:| In order to sue for palming off, the owners would need to show that the bags would create consumer confusion. On page 516, the author of the textbook uses the example of DeBiers instead of DeBeers (diamonds) as a potentially confusing name. The name changes in the problem are not that similar and are probably not going to confuse someone – but this is short answer. As long as the student says "potentially confusing," give credit whichever way they say the outcome would be.| |

|
 | Points Received:| 15 of 15 |
 |
|
|
 3.| Question :| (TCO C)  One summer, David Baxter and his wife, Melissa, were on their new boat with another couple, tubing on the Mississippi river. David and the other couple had been drinking all day, "about seven or eight beers each and some Crown Royal," although Melissa wasn't drinking due to being pregnant. As he prepared to jump into the water to tube, David's feet slipped out from under him, and he fell into the...
tracking img