StaCeYY has come to you seeking your advice as to the nature of her intellectual property rights arising from the facts above, including any she may have in respect of Samantha’s films, and how best to protect them at law. Advise her. Comment on how those rights may be different if she had taken steps to protect her rights earlier.
Identify the relevant facts and issues, i.e, what are the parties disagreeing about?
Facts and the issues that are discussed in the process were appropriate with the StaCeYY’s case. In it, one of the rivals of StaCeYY has copied her logo as well as the design of the dining table which she has designed. This affects the business of the company as they have their uniqueness in the designs (Shell, 1987). The copying of the dining table design was done from the online brochure and also a video which was made by Smantha, a friend of staceyy and was put it on the facebook page of StaCeYY. MiChaeL was the furniture manufacturing company which has copied the stuff of StaCeYY. But he was disagreeing about the facts and issues that he had copied the logo of StaCeYY. For this issue, StaCeYY is seeking help from the professional who can guide her to use the intellectual property rights and laws (Selvadurai, 2008).
Identify the relevant law (case law or legislation) to resolving the problem?
The relevant law which can be used for the protection of intellectual property trade mark is Trade Mark Act 1995. This law will help StaCeYY to protect the trademark of the furniture manufacturing company. However, firstly, they need to apply for making the trademark as the intellectual property. She has not applied for the intellectual property law. Therefore, she can’t stop anyone from using the kind of trade which she used for her marketing purpose in the market. On the other hand, the same is with the designs of the dining table. The protection can be taken from the intellectual property rights because StaCeYY is 7 years older than that of the MiCheaL. She can apply against the trademark copyrights and also the marketing of the dining table of similar designs.
In the intellectual designs of the manufacturing goods, no manufacturers have the right that they can blame other companies to use similar kind of designs unless or until they would not register with the Australian government under the intellectual property rights(Shell, 1987).