1A) Intellectual property refers to creation of mind, which includes new inventions, outlines; and images, names and pictures utilized as a part of trade. Intellectual property by law, for example, copyright ,patents and trademarks, which gives people recognition for what they have done and finical benefits of what they produce. These rights are laid in article 27 of the Universal declaration of Human right , which provides right to profit the protection of materials ,literary or artistic productions. As technology makes more adept and more expert in the present world. New technologies continue to violate intellectual property right in one or other way. Here are few examples : 1) S. Victor Whitmill v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc : …show more content…
John Harvey Kellogg said that consuming the oat was similar to "consuming a whisk sweeper," and commentators at the World Fair in Chicago in 1893 called it "shredded doormat." After perky died in 1908, the two patents, on the biscuits and the machinery got expired in 1912. Kellogg Company began to sell a similar cereal. In 1913 National Biscuit company, filed lawsuit against Kellogg Company, arguing that Kellogg company disregarded trademark infringement by consuming the shredded wheat market. In 1938, the case was brought to the supreme court, which decided for the Kellogg Company in light of the fact that the expression "shredded wheat" was not trademark able, and its cushion shape was useful and hence ready to be duplicated after the patent had …show more content…
To make his prints, Raimondi cut point by point copies of Durer’s wood square. The prints, with Durer’s "A" above "D" mark, could pass as Durer firsts, and Raimondi made significant benefits off of them. Durer took issue and brought his case to the court of Venice. At last, the court decided that Raimondi could keep making duplicates, the length of he precluded the monogram. 5. Mattel Inc. v. MGA Entertainment Inc : Barbie was 42 year old when this came up, Bratz dolls, Jade, Sasha and Yasmin came to the scene in 2001. Tension raised rapidly as the Bratz sezied about 40 percent of Barbie’s stuff in just five years. In 2005 Bratz their maker MGA Entertainment Inc. filed a lawsuit against Mattel, calming that Barbie’s copied of Bratz dolls idea. Mattel then hit back MGA Entertainment, giving a statement that Bratz designer Carter Bryant for having designed the dolls when he was associated with Mattel payroll. Mattel Clarified all designed made under Mattel contract were Mattel property. In July 2008, A jury ruled in favor of Mattel, MGA ended up paying about $100 million to Mattel and to remove Bratz dolls from their