Copyright Protection for Business Slogans and Websites

This business law assignment analyzes the applicability of Australian copyright law to protect business slogans and websites. It delves into relevant sections of the Copyright Act 1968, highlighting provisions related to original literary, artistic, and dramatic works, including computer programs and website designs. The assignment uses case studies like *Telstra Corporation Limited v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd* and *State of Victoria v Pacific Technologies (Australia) Pty Ltd* to illustrate how copyright protects unique creations while acknowledging limitations on protecting ideas and techniques.

Running head: BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Business Law Assignment
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Table of Contents
Issue.................................................................................................................................................2
Rules................................................................................................................................................2
Application......................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................5
Reference.........................................................................................................................................6

2BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Issue
As per the case facts the issue has been found that whether Duncan able to protect his
business slogan and website under the copyright Protection Act?
Rules
The Australian copyright act 1968 has stated the provisions of rights of the creators for
the creative and artistic works in Australia. The copyright act helps to protect every idea and
information which has been created and expressed by the creator and also provides the moral
rights to the creators under the Australian authority. The copyright act describes the rights of
attribution of authorship, the rights against false attribution of authorship and the rights of
integrity of authorship where it provides a complete protection to the author’s work for copy
publish, communicate and publicly reform the copyright material (Papageorgiadis, Alexiou and
Nellis 2016).
According to the copyright act the part 3 has described the protection of the original
literacy, musical, artistic and dramatic works where along with the computer programs business
slogans and website productions also. In this part the section 36 has defined the acts of
infringement where it is comprised in the copyright protection and the person who is not the
creator of the work must not influenced who is the original work. Therefore that person who is
the creator of the original work should influence under the copyright protection act for the
protection of the original production. However the copyright act though protects the originality
of the work of the creator but it never protected the information or ideas of the original author.

3BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
In the case of Telstra Corporation Limited v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd
[2001] the federal court of Australia has found that the company has been registered with the
copyright Protection Act where the court has stated the decision for allowing the subjects of the
product for the using of telephone service number and found the same service with the publicly
listed directories. However in this case the respondent has influenced of the copyright under the
copyright act of 1968 of Australia.
In another case Australia Accor Australia & New Zealand Hospitality Pty Ltd v Liv
Pty Ltd [2015] the court has found that the trademark of the company has influenced by the
defendant and both the plaintiff and defendant owned same identical trademarks however court
has registered decision against of the defendant where they found that plaintiff was already
registered under the trademarks and allow him to continue with his business trademarks
(Papageorgiadis, Alexiou and Nellis 2016).
In the case of IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [2009]
literacy work has been influenced by the defendant however due to the infringement of the
copyright act the defendant has finned with penalties under the copyright act.
Another famous case State of Victoria v Pacific Technologies (Australia) Pty Ltd (No
2) [2009] where in the business are trading name, slogan registered under the trademarks but
they have found that the right has been infringed as for the phrase of ordinary substantial and
common place to constitute the original literacy work. However the copyright act 1968 has found
not to put it the idea of such phrase of the company as the copyright act never able to protect the
idea and information of the creators work (Murray and Unit 2014).

4BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Application
The fact of the case is Richard Mops who started a car rental company with the website
name of Outback rentals where he used red, yellow and Orange color scheme along with the
style font Outback. He was using the slogan “Zoom Zoom Australia” where it provides various
offers for the customers including car rental options, holidays, tourism package. In the same area
Duncan Davies who continuing his family car rental business from past 10 years where he
named his website “Red Dirt Rentals” and using the slogan of “Zoom Zoom Safaris” he has used
the bright red and Orange color scheme including the stylish font Outback and this website also
offers various packages for the customers which includes rental, tourism, transport, food and
other accommodation packages. However, he recently notice that his business is decreasing due
to the Outback rentals is became popular for the customers therefore now he want to protect his
website and the business slogan under the copyright act of Australia (Papageorgiadis, Alexiou
and Nellis 2016).
The copyright has provided various obligations and rights to the creators who make the
original works which includes text, sound, recording, artistic work, music and computer
programs. Therefore they have right to use and application of such works. They can perform or
introduce such work to the public (Murray and Unit 2014). However the copyright act defines a
special separate right for the property where it automatically protects such works. It helps to
protect:
 Any literacy works like novels journal articles and including computer programs and
websites
 it also protects the artistic works which would be photographs, cartoon, sculptures, craft
work

5BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
 it protects the dramatic works like musical work with lyrics, choreography
 The names titles and slogans which are also protected under this act hair the slogans
which are used by the original creator me use the trademarks which help them to protect
under the legal obligations.
Therefore if Duncan has protected his business registration under the trademarks act.
Therefore it will automatically protect the website business slogan along with the website. The
proper registration will help him to protect the business name, slogan and the website but the
idea, style and techniques which has been used those are never protected under the copyright act.
The person who owned his own creation has right to set rules under the copyright work where
they can publicly published his work and it will protect the originality of such work for 70 years
from the year of Publication (Papageorgiadis, Alexiou and Nellis 2016).
Conclusion
According to the case study it can be concluded that Duncan is the original creator of all
of his car rental business which has been continuing from last 10 years. Therefore according to
the copyright act if the original creator found that the work has been influenced by some other
person then he can claim for the damages where it can be compensate. If the defendant has found
guilty with such infringement of copyright act therefore he can be punished with penalties or
imprisoned for up to 2 years (Murray and Unit 2014).

6BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Reference
Accor Australia & New Zealand Hospitality Pty Ltd v Liv Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 554 (5 June
2015)
IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [2009] HCA 14.
Murray, T. and Unit, I.P., 2014. Duration of Copyright Protection in Australia.
Papageorgiadis, N., Alexiou, C. and Nellis, J.G., 2016. International licensing revisited: the role
of copyright and trademark enforcement strength. European Journal of Innovation Management,
19(2), pp.261-275.
State of Victoria v Pacific Technologies (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] FCA 737
Stokes, S., 2014. Digital copyright: law and practice. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Telstra Corporation Limited v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 612