Reference no: EM131951495

Assignmen

You must respond to at least two of your classmates posts.

All follow-up posts to your classmates must be a minimum of 150 words for each required post.

Aaron Hanson

Good evening class,

I was not to familiar with any of these topics so I had to do some research before answering. According to the court, they stipulate that in using the Inwood test, it is the trademark owner's responsibility to monitor and report any encroachments on its trademark (Davidson). According to the evidence that Tiffany's produced, eBay was not liable for the actions of the sellers for trademark infringement, due to the fact that eBay only had generalized knowledge that trademark infringement might not have been taking place (Davidson). Reports state no "intentionally inducement" to infringe on Tiffany's trademark or "contributory trademark infringement" because they could not prove that eBay was purposely encouraging infringement on the trademark.

As an online service provider, everything is considered priority but the term"the customer is always correct applies". I would do whatever I could to make everything right but starting with the customer. Unfortunaitely as a service provider your duty doe not lie with in either. As a company you have duties and responsibilities that you must follow with in the law pr consequences will occur.

I don't think they should by law be required to "police" anything if they do not want to but I believe it would be wise to document and log everything to protect the company. Now I work in Human Resources and am logging paperwork all day so I know how hard and near impossible it is to keep up with everything. Amazon is three times the size of the company I work for so i can see how it would literally be impossible to keep track of every single purchase, sail, paperwork etc.

Davidson, Sara. Tiffany Vs ebay, Revisited. Retrieved, May 3, 2010. https://www.theiplawblog.com/2010/05/articles/trademark-law/tiffany-v-ebay-revisited/

James Pettigrew

Read the case study on pp. 118-120 of the textbook and answer the following questions:

1. Why wasn't eBay held liable for the infringing sales made by users? (HINT: Describe how the elements of the Inwood test apply to eBay's actions).

I think that Internet commerce needs to have law reform. The main reason why eBay was not held liable is because their wasn't any laws at the time to protect companies like Tiffanys. However, I also think that eBay should be protected as they are simply providing a platform for users and businesses to exchange goods just as a property manager/owner would lease out property for businesses to do the same in a brick and mortar store. If a store or businesses is doing something unethical, you wouldn't hold the property owner liable right?

2. As an online service provider, to whom to do you owe the greater duty? To your customer who wish to knowingly (i.e. without confusion) buy cheaper, imitation products? Or to unrelated businesses whose valuable intellectual property is being flagrantly violated on your site? Would you take precautions beyond what the law requires to reduce infringing sales?

When my wife and I were traveling in Italy, there would goods sold in side shops that actually had stenciling on the inside collar that said "Not original" or "Imitation" or something to that effect. I am not sure if that is the law there, but I think that if you are a consumer that wants to buy imitation goods, which I don't understand the logic of wanting a fake branded item, then business owners should respect intellectual property by stamping goods with labels like "Not Original" or "Fake" or something to that affect. I am sure many people in here have been to places on streets where people sell fake stuff. I remember in DC people would sell fake Oakleys. Sure, as a teenager with minimal money, it made sense for us to buy some because they looked just like the real deal.

However, I also believe that many companies try to do their best in creating brand recognition. That should be protected. If consumers want cheaper products, they should buy cheaper products. Buying a knock off coach bag does nothing for you but make you look foolish.

Read the case study on pp. 164-166 of the textbook and answer the following questions:

3. What duty should OSPs such as Amazon that host content uploaded by others owe to copyright holders? Should such OSPs be required to "police" their websites to detect and prevent copyright infringement?

Ferrera, Gerald R., Margo E. Reder, Stephen Lichtenstein, Robert Bird, Jonathan Darrow, Jeff. CyberLaw: Text and Cases. Cengage Learning, 01/2011. VitalBook file.

No. Like I stated in the first question, we do not ask property owners to police their tenant businesses. Why should eBay and Amazon?