1
Chapter 7
Intellectual Property and Cyber Piracy
VI. Answers to Critical Legal Thinking Cases
7.1 Patent
No, the claimed invention is not patentable. In order to be patentable, the claimed invention must be novel
and nonobvious. Laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas do not meet these criteria and
are therefore not patentable. The concepts covered by laws of nature and abstract ideas are part of the
storehouse of knowledge of all men, free to all men and reserved exclusively to none. Claims 1 and 4 of
7.2 Trademark
Yes, Zura Kazhiloti is liable for trademark infringement. The storeowners testified that they had
purchased the counterfeit jewelry from Kazhiloti that contained the trademarks of Cartier International
A.G and Van Cleef & Arpels and produced invoices showing the purchase of such jewelry. They also
testified that Kazhiloti gave them certificates of authenticity that the jewelry came from Cartier and Van
Cleefs & Arpels. The jewelry sold by Kazhiloti to the jewelry stores, which were then sold to
The U.S. Court of Appeals held that the incorporation by the Beastie Boys of a short segment of a
whether so much is taken that the value of the original is sensibly diminished. The court held that when
viewed in relation to Newton’s composition as a whole, the sampled portion was neither quantitatively
nor qualitatively significant. Quantitatively, the three-note sequence appeared only once in Newton’s
composition. When played, the segment lasted six seconds and was roughly two percent of the four-and-
2
Appeals held that the Beastie Boys’s de minimis sampling of Newton’s “Choir” composition constituted
7.4 Trademark
Yes, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.’s (CBOCS) use of the “Cracker Barrel” name on the food
products it proposes to sell in grocery stores infringes on the Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC (Kraft)
Cracker Barrel trademark. The words “Cracker Barrel” on both labels might lead the shopper to think
thinking it the producer—Kraft’s sales of Cracker Barrel cheeses are likely to decline. The U.S. court of
appeals affirmed the injunction issued by the U.S. district court that prevents CBOLS from selling food
once in the play. Dodger’s use of the clip advances its own original creation without any reasonable threat
to SOFA Entertainment’s business model. In the end, we are left with the following conclusion: Dodger’s
why the ‘fair use’ doctrine exists.” The U.S. court of appeals held that Dodger’s use of the seven-second
downloaded, played, and retained on one’s hard drive for future use is a direct substitute for a purchased
copy. As file sharing has increased, the sales of recorded music have dropped. The events likely are
damages against Gonzalez, and issued an injunction against Gonzalez, enjoining her from further
888, 2005 U.S. App. Lexis 26903 (United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 2005)
VII. Answers to Ethics Cases
3
7.7 Ethics Case
“software.” The defendant’s unauthorized use of the Intelsys Software name and trademark falsely
indicates to consumers that the defendant’s products and services are in some manner connected with, or
related to, plaintiff Intel. The defendant’s use of the mark allows it to benefit from the goodwill
established by Intel and will continue to have an adverse effect on the value of, and distinctive quality of,
defendant took the INTEL trademark and did the same by adding the abbreviated term sys to the mark
INTEL. This was an obvious and unethical means of stealing the recognition and goodwill established by
7.8 Ethics Case
the Passport video is not de minimis, but is significant. The court found that Passport’s use of the
Appeals denied Passport’s claim of fair use and affirmed the District Court’s judgment that enjoined
been the case. Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. Passport Video, 349 F.3d 622, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis
22775 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2003)