Case Scenarios: BUGusa, Inc.
1.) WIRETIME, Inc. Advertisement
WIRETIME published an advertisement stating that BUGusa's electronic recording devices, "Were low quality" and, "Did not work reliably for more than 1 month" (Case scenarios: BUGusa, Inc.). If WIRETIME insulted BUGusa knowing the statements of insult are untrue, WIRETIME becomes libel for torts suffered by BUGusa. WIRETIME committed defamation, trade libel, and fraudulent misrepresentation. To prove defamation BUGusa's lawyers must locate the defamatory statements. Both statements, in the advertisement, adversely represent BUGusa. Next the burden of proof rests on dissemination to a third party. The industry magazine containing the publication is, "Well-known" (Case scenarios: BUGusa, Inc.). Specificity names the business. BUGusa as a company becomes associated with the statements made by WIRETIME in the advertisement. The last point of reference includes damages. BUGusa can expect damages as the quote, "Did not work reliably for more than 1 month," more likely will deter sales as consumers may begin to lose faith in the product. An analysis of sales from the previous year compared with the current year becomes evidence to prove damages (Ch. 9, p. 209). Trade libel torts and fraudulent misrepresentation exists as WIRETIME uses the statements to undermine BUGusa and gain an edge on the competition. If BUGusa proves WIRETIME's attack on customer loyalty, BUGusa has a chance to recover damages. A court may expect WIRETIME to prove its reasoning behind the libel statements. If WIRETIME cannot prove it used BUGusa's products and found a poor quality product or faced injury, a judge may conclude that WIRETIME acted as a tortfeasor. The judge would order WIRETIME to pull the ad and offer a written apology, at the very least. 2.) WIRETIME, Inc. Janet
In this case WIRETIME has committed tortious interference by inducing Janet to break her contract with BUGusa, and go to work for them even after she made...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document