TRCoE and TOU declared that the thesis submission of mechanical engineering graduate students had extensive and deliberate plagiarism through a press conference. The faculty, including the person JG who was the chair of the department, was singled out for “ignoring the ethical responsibility.” JG was not allowed to advise the student. JG filed a case because the due process was not followed. To find : The requirement of due process under the following situation.

Question

Yuri created a very unique service offered by her company. Her company dubs lesson and speeches to any language for political persons and resource speaker. In order to protect her company from unfair competition what type of intellectual property should Yuri apply for? Yuri should apply for copyright P so that no one can published their service without their permission Yuri should apply for industrial design to protect the ornamental shape of their product Yuri should apply for geographical origin since product came from their home town Yuri should apply for service mark in order to protect her company from unfair competition

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 4, Problem 3BCP

Summary Introduction

Case summary: TRCoE and TOU declared that the thesis submission of mechanical engineering graduate students had extensive and deliberate plagiarism through a press conference. The faculty, including the person JG who was the chair of the department, was singled out for “ignoring the ethical responsibility.” JG was not allowed to advise the student. JG filed a case because the due process was not followed.

To find: The requirement of due process under the following situation.

Expert Solution & Answer

Trending nowThis is a popular solution!

See solution

Check out sample textbook solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Yuri created a very unique service offered by her company. Her company dubs lesson and speeches to any language for political persons and resource speaker. In order to protect her company from unfair competition what type of intellectual property should Yuri apply for? Yuri should apply for copyright P so that no one can published their service without their permission Yuri should apply for industrial design to protect the ornamental shape of their product Yuri should apply for geographical origin since product came from their home town Yuri should apply for service mark in order to protect her company from unfair competition

World Color operated a printing plant. a written policy stated: “Baseball caps are prohibited except for [world Color] baseball caps.” The policy permitted employees to accessorize their uniforms “in good taste and in accordance with all safety rules.” The Graphic Communications Conference of the international Brotherhood of Teamsters filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB claiming that the policy prohibited employees from wearing union insignia at work. it said world Color was interfering with its employees’ “right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, . . . and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining” as guaranteed by federal law. The NLRB agreed and world Color appealed. Was the baseball cap policy an unfair labor practice?

4-1 REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS ON FREE SPEECH. Michael Mayfield, the president of Mendo Mill and Lumber Company in California, received a “notice of a legal claim” from Edward Starski. This “claim” alleged that a stack of lumber fell on a customer as a result of a Mendo employee’s “incompetence.” The “notice” presented a settlement offer on the customer’s behalf in exchange for a release of liability for Mendo. In a follow-up phone conversation with Mayfield, Starski said that he was an attorney—which, in fact, he was not. Starski was arrested and charged with violating a state statute that prohibited the unlawful practice of law. He argued that “creating an illusion” that he was an attorney fell within the protection of his First Amendment right to free speech. Is Starski correct? Explain your answer. [The People v. Edward Robert Starski, 7 Cal.App.5th 215, 212 Cal.Rptr.3d 622 (1 Dist. 2017)] (See Business and the Bill of Rights.)