business law midterm - Erin Street Business Law Professor...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Erin Street Business Law Professor Longo Spring 2011 Midterm Ch. 10, Question 1 I do believe that Starbucks Corporatipon has standing to bring suit in China against Xingbake Café Corp. Ltd. Not only is the name ‘Starbucks’ is a qualified registriable trademark, but it has also acquired distinctiveness as being synomous with a coffee shop/café. Xiangbake is the translated equivalent of the trade name Starbucks. Because the names are confusingly similar and are in the same product market, Xingbake is infringing on Starbucks of Seattle Washingtons copyrights. Given that China participates in the Madrid Protocol, the company is violating rules of the international trademark registration, which states that U.S. companies that sell their products in foreign countries can register their marks and be provided protection in those signatory countries. Ch. 10, Question 3 I would suggest that he received a patent to protect his works. If he received a patent for his semiconductor chips, he would have protection of being the only person/company capable of producing that specific product. I would recommend that he apply for a utility patent, under which he would receive protection for his product for 20 years. Ch. 12, Question 1 A contract is a legally binding agreement. It is an agreement in which if breeched, the law has a place to step in and remedy to create a solution. A contract must contain all of the following three parts, an agreement made by competent parties that is supported by consideration and must be legal. Ch. 12, Question 6 The defense that a contract is not binding because it is not sealed is not valid. There is nothing that says that a contract must be on a scroll and sealed with wax and a seal to make it legal and binding. Any agreement that is made by consensual adults with knowledge of what the contract entails, and signed is a contract. This could mean that the contract between A and B could have been written on a bar napkin or takeout menu and would still have the same legal status as if it was on a scroll with a wax seal. Ch. 12, Question 9 No, because Dozier did not make up and sign a contract with Paschall, he is not required to pay for the home improvements. Dozier’s daughter and grandson may have ask Paschall to complete the improvements but there was no agreement made between Dozier and Paschall. If Dozier had made an oral or written contract or agreement with Paschall, then he would be legally
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/24/2011 for the course BUL 2320 taught by Professor Longo during the Spring '11 term at University of Central Florida.

Page1 / 4

business law midterm - Erin Street Business Law Professor...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online