Intellectual Property Rights and Susie's Legal Challenges

This report provides an analysis of intellectual property law, focusing on a case involving a food technologist named Susie. The report examines various aspects of intellectual property rights, including copyright, patents, and the law of confidence. It addresses whether Susie can prevent her friends from selling a similar product based on her invention, whether she is liable to her former company, AlcoCorp, for alleged patent infringement, and whether she has breached the intellectual property rights of other authors, Ravi and Joe. The report discusses the legal principles related to these issues, including the requirements for establishing breach of confidence and copyright infringement. The conclusion summarizes the findings, emphasizing the importance of protecting intellectual property rights. The report includes references to relevant legal texts and academic sources.

Intellectual Property
Law

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK...............................................................................................................................................1
A) Whether Susie is able to prevent her friends from selling similar product............................1
B) Whether she could be successfully claimed by cited company.............................................3
C) Whether she has breached Intellectual property rights of Ravi or Joe...................................4
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6
.........................................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
In this present time period, it can be noticed that Intellectual property rights have its
own significance. Intellectual property is a term which signifies construction of intellect in
regard to which a monopoly is allotted to elected owners by law or legislation for time
being in force 1. In this light, Intellectual property rights are rights which are granted to
those people who are signified as creators of intellectual property. It includes copyrights,
patents, trademarks and industrial design rights. In this report different concepts in
regard to applicability and infringement of copyrights and patents of person is
discussed. In addition to this, in this report, various provisions of Law of Confidence and
Copyright law is also mentioned.
TASK
A) Whether Susie is able to prevent her friends from selling similar product
Intellectual property rights are assigned to those person or parties and business
organizations who are developers and creators of different and varied intellectual
properties 2. In addition to this, Intellectual property law can be seen as a part of English
Property Law which is related to rights allotted to a person in respect of intangible rights
and information. In this regard, there are also varied range of codes and regulations
framed in respect of copyrights and trademarks. The main objectives of Intellectual
Property Law are as:
 Incentives in terms of Financial terms.
 Growth and prosperity of economy.
 Morality.
Moreover, Law of confidence can be explained in such a terms which means to
protect secrets. Considering this, there is an idea which is related to breach of
confidence. Breach of confidence can be understood as an equitable doctrine, through
1 Bently L, Sherman B. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, USA;
2014.
2 Candelin-Palmqvist H, Sandberg B, Mylly UM. Intellectual property rights in
innovation management research: a review. Technovation. 2012 Oct
31;32(9):502-12.
1

which a person is permitted to claim a remedy in case of his confidence has been
breached. A duty of confidence seems to be arise in a circumstance in which secret
information or a document comes in understanding of a person, disclosure of which
would be unfair 3. In accordance with the provisions of Law of Confidence, a person is
not authorised or permitted to copy another person’s goods or disclose any private
information until and unless:
 The person which has a relation with an information, has made his consent.
 In case where it is being rendered necessary to disclose a secret information for
reasons of safeguarding an individual. Along with this, it can be in public interest.
 Moreover, unveil of information or any material evidence is imposed as a legal
duty to perform. It includes duty of court.
With reference to the given case scenario, Susie is a food technologist, she has
developed a way in which alcohol can be form by adding a quantity of water in it. In
addition to this, she invited her friends, who were also recognised as food technologists
at her home for dinner party. It is a considerable fact that her friend is started to
advertise his product which is similar with product of Susie. Furthermore, a company
namely, AlcoCorp, in which Susie used to work as an administrator, claimed that she
has taken ideas of methodologies from one of experiments.
Acknowledging with regulations and provisions of Confidence law and copyright
law, it can be held that Susie is likely to be in a situation to prevent her friend from
selling and advertising similar and like kind products 4. It is due to reason that it was
invented by Susie and in dinner party she has shown an experiment to her friends of
formation of alcohol with addition of water in it. So, it can be treated as information and
formula leaked or copied by her friend. So, it can be concluded under common law, that
she can prevent or stop him from selling similar kind of goods and services.
Furthermore, in light of Law of confidence, her friend has breached a duty of
confidence, owed by him. As, in persistence of requirements of law of confidence,
3 Ellison NB, Boyd DM. Sociality through social network sites. InThe Oxford
handbook of internet studies 2013 Jan 10.
4 Fillmore CJ, Baker C. A frames approach to semantic analysis. InThe Oxford
handbook of linguistic analysis 2010 Jan.
2

courts in UK, will treat rupture of confidence in case of presence of following three
elements:
 The information which has been leaked was supposed to have a necessary
confidence degree in it.
 Any data leaked was rendered in a situation which implies an obligation of
confidence 5.
 Unauthorised use of information has been enabled and created a risk of damage.
So, in end, as per provisions, Susie is authorised t permit her friend from selling any
similar or like kind product in market.
B) Whether she could be successfully claimed by cited company
In respect of laws and provisions of Intellectual property law, owner of patent is
permitted and authorised to restrict or prohibit any person who infringes any patent
being assigned to him.in this light, it is a notable fact that a person who is a possessor
of a patent right, he can claim against a person if he finds him infringing or breaching his
patent right. Corrective and appropriate legal actions can also be taken in respect of
rupture or infringement of a patent. In addition to this, patent infringement can be
caused by unauthorised utilisation and sale of a patented invention with having no
information and permission from holder of patent.
With reference to the given case scenario, Alcocorp company has claimed Susie
in regard to copy of its assigned patent in respect of a product. The company has
argued that she has taken the methodology from one of their process of experiment.
Having regard to above said provisions of Patent Law, it can be said that Susie
has infringed or breached a right of patents which has been assigned to cited company.
As violation of rights of patents depicts a situation in which someone sells, manufacture,
utilise or imports a good or process of a patented product without obtaining permission
or access to it 6. Considering this, cited company can claim or sue Susie in court due to
5 Snyder M, Deaux K. Personality and social psychology. InThe Oxford handbook
of personality and social psychology 2012.
6 Torremans P. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford
University Press; 2016.
3

her crime of copying a process of a product namely formation of alcohol by adding
water in it.
In accordance with regulations laid down in Patent act, its infringement can be
minimised. Furthermore, it can be reduced by supplying a complete description in
respect of invention. It will make authorities able to have detailed and complete
knowledge of product which will help in protection of a patent 7.
C) Whether she has breached Intellectual property rights of Ravi or Joe
Intellectual property rights are those rights which are given to a person in case of
invention or discovery of a new product or services. It includes copyrights, trademarks,
patents, industrial rights of designs. It also includes other works like Artistic works,
discoveries of work, phrases, symbols, designs etc 8. A copyright is a concept in which
exclusive rights are given to creator of an original work, for a limited period of time. It is
a concept which is applicable to a diverse range of intellectual, artistic and creative
works. However, the term copyright does not comprise information and ideas rather only
manner and form in which it has been expressed is included.
With reference to a provided case situation, it was mentioned that a book on food
technology has also been written by Susie. In her book, she has included several
sections from science book published by Ravi and also some comments regarding why
he is not correct and accurate in aspect of his scientific assessment. On the other hand,
Joe has also sued Susie for copying certain principles from his book of food technology.
But, Susie has not copied anything from his book but Joe argues that she has followed
the architecture of his book.
In this sense, it can be seen as an outcome that Susie has infringed copyright of
Joe. It is due to provision of copyright law which conveys that if any person prints or for
several copy of already assigned patent right, then it can be considered as an
infringement of copyright. As per norms and rules of said act, it is a term which includes
7 Kim YK, Lee K, Park WG, Choo K. Appropriate intellectual property protection
and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research
policy. 2012 Mar 31;41(2):358-75.
8 Hovenkamp H, Carrier M A. IP and antitrust: an analysis of antitrust principles
applied to intellectual property law. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; 2016
4

imitating, distributing, demonstrating, or performing of a work or any other kind, which
create derivative works without attaining any consent from holder of exclusive rights 9. It
can be a business organization or publisher, who represents work done by creator. In
other words, it can also be called as Privacy10 .
With reference to the above said provisions of Law of Copyright, it can be
comprehended that Susie has exploited or breached Ravi’s copyright, as she included
some of his sections in her book. In his light, Ravi can take appropriate actions against
her. However, she has not infringed copyright of Joe, as she has not copied anything
from his book.
CONCLUSION
From the above mentioned report, it can be concluded that Intellectual property
rights are those exclusive rights which are assigned to a person in respect of performing
an invention or discovery in regard to any product or services. In this light various
aspects of Law of Confidence and Copyright law also discussed. In addition to this,
various cases which in which breach of confidence is not applicable has also been
elaborated. Moreover, there are certain principles which protect rights of copy rights and
patents which should be properly person.
9 Fromer JC. Expressive Incentives in Intellectual Property. Virginia Law Review.
2012 Dec 1:1745-824.
10 Parker G, Van Alstyne M. Innovation, openness & platform control.
InProceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Electronic commerce 2010 Jun 7
(pp. 95-96). ACM
5

REFERENCES
Books and Journal
Bently L, Sherman B. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, USA; 2014.
Candelin-Palmqvist H, Sandberg B, Mylly UM. Intellectual property rights in innovation
management research: a review. Technovation. 2012 Oct 31;32(9):502-12.
Ellison NB, Boyd DM. Sociality through social network sites. InThe Oxford handbook of
internet studies 2013 Jan 10.
Fillmore CJ, Baker C. A frames approach to semantic analysis. InThe Oxford handbook
of linguistic analysis 2010 Jan.
Fromer JC. Expressive Incentives in Intellectual Property. Virginia Law Review. 2012
Dec 1:1745-824.
Hovenkamp H, Carrier M A. IP and antitrust: an analysis of antitrust principles applied to
intellectual property law. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; 2016.
Kim YK, Lee K, Park WG, Choo K. Appropriate intellectual property protection and
economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research
policy. 2012 Mar 31;41(2):358-75.
Parker G, Van Alstyne M. Innovation, openness & platform control. InProceedings of the
11th ACM conference on Electronic commerce 2010 Jun 7 (pp. 95-96). ACM
Snyder M, Deaux K. Personality and social psychology. InThe Oxford handbook of
personality and social psychology 2012.
Torremans P. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University
Press; 2016.
6

7