help with the bold

Your PBS series Start Up entrepreneur (Stitch people) appreciated your brief presentation covering the top three (3) legal issues and/or opportunities they should take into consideration with their business. They would like you to expand upon your recommendations.

1. Executive Summary

a. summary of three (3) legal issues and/or opportunity recommendations

2. Legal Issue/Opportunity 1

a. Issue/Opportunity: Discuss and define the issue or opportunity using one (1) or more legal terms.

b. FIDR Analysis: Find one (1) recent case (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation and make a Facts, Issue, Decision, and Reason (FIDR) analysis of the case

c. Nexis Uni Article: Find and describe one (1) recent article (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation.

d. Recommendation Analysis: Explain how both the case and the article supports your recommendation.

3.Legal Issue/Opportunity 2 a. Issue/Opportunity: Discuss and define the issue or opportunity using one (1) or more legal terms. b. FIDR Analysis: Find one (1) recent case (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation and make a Facts, Issue, Decision, and Reason (FIDR) analysis of the case c. Nexis Uni Article: Find and describe one (1) recent article (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation. d. Recommendation Analysis: Explain how both the case and the article supports your recommendation.

4. Legal Issue/Opportunity 3 Employment a. Issue/Opportunity: Discuss and define the issue or opportunity using one (1) or more legal terms. b. FIDR Analysis: Find one (1) recent case (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation and make a Facts, Issue, Decision, and Reason (FIDR) analysis of the case. c. Nexis Uni Article: Find and describe one (1) recent article (2017-2022) which supports your recommendation. d. Recommendation Analysis: Explain how both the case and the article supports your recommendation.

5. Future Outlook a. Timeline: Discuss the timeline for implementing the recommendations. b. Future Impact: Discuss the possible future impact of the recommendations on their business.

-

Executive Summary: No one thinks about the legal requirements of their business when they are starting out. However, every firm will have to deal with legal concerns at some time. The law has a significant influence on enterprises. For example the case of Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics. You've probably witnessed a slew of legal blunders made by business founders. Even if you have a basic awareness of the law, there are numerous unforeseeable traps to be aware of when it comes to running a legally sound business. From establishing your business to complying with regulations to safeguarding your intellectual property, it's all considered a crucial part of your company's success. One need to split legal concerns into two categories: legal difficulties that every business faces before incorporation and legal issues that every business faces after incorporation. The three main ones I will be further explaining to you are licensing for business, intellectual property rights and employment. Three (3) legal issues and/or opportunity recommendations:

Licensing for businesses: Don't mix up the terms "business license" with "business registration." Both terms are very different. To earn the right to establish a business in a certain city, startups must register with the authorities and obtain a license. One need to be sure whether or not you require a business license. In general, each type of company required a particular type of license. Knowing which license you require, on the other hand, might be a difficult but necessary business necessity. Many companies are either unaware of the legal requirements or are unaware of them. The sort of business license you require is determined by the type of activity your company engages in.

IPR(Intellectual property rights): Whoever stated that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery didn't had a startup. The fact is that when you have a great concept, imitators will appear out of nowhere to take it. Every firm is distinct, and IP protection gives each one its own identity. Investing in a corporate brand entails linking the company's name to an innovative method or product design that provides you a competitive edge. There are several ways to safeguard your startup's intellectual property if it has something fresh and inventive to keep copycats on their toes and to preserve and stimulate innovation: Registration of trademarks, copyright, and patent designs.

Employment: When your company starts to develop, the first step is to hire staff and contractors. When it comes to employment contract restrictions, you must be cautious. Inadequate employment documentation has a lot of negative effects for startups. If the employer-employee relationship is not correctly defined, you will almost certainly face allegations of discrimination, violation of contract, and so on. According to a report, over 8% of organizations have had employment concerns, making employment the most prevalent legal issue for enterprises.

The following recommendation can assist you in selecting the most appropriate opportunity in defined legal structure legal structure: 1. One of the factors is how much control you desire over your company: One Person Company is the best option if you wish to run your business entirely on your own. 2. Formation Complexity: Every legal structure has its own set of processes and complexity when it comes to setup. A private limited corporation is simple to establish, however a trust has more criteria. 3. Implications for Taxation: The taxes you pay will be influenced by your legal structure. A solo trader, for example, can claim tax benefits on his or her personal tax return, but not under a trust. 4. Limitation of Liability Check: The extent to which you need to be shielded from personal legal responsibilities when adopting a legal structure.

2. Legal Issue/Opportunity 1: One has to get and maintain a business license regardless of the sort of business you own whether it is located in a physical storefront or online and whether it is a small or large firm (possibly more than one). It might be tough to comprehend company licensing.

A business license is a government-issued obligatory license or permit that allows a company to operate in a given jurisdiction. This license is frequently required in addition to the state-level registration of a business. The kind of a business, the sorts of items it offers, and the local government rules in the location of the firm all influence whether it is necessary to obtain a special license. Following opportunities are opened by obtaining license for business: 1. Business licenses keep companies accountable for their activities and conduct while also protecting the public's health and safety. 2. Professional licenses represent the level of competence possessed by a certain professional. 3. For the selling of taxable items, sales tax permits are necessary. 4. Licenses are used by the government to track income for tax purposes.

Almost any firm that generates revenue will be needed to get a business license, permission, or registration in order to operate lawfully and in accordance with government rules. All firms operating inside a jurisdiction must get certain permits. These are some of them: 1. Basic Business Permits 2. Registration for Payroll Taxes (if there are employees) 3. Registration for Sales Tax (if it sells tangible goods or performs taxable service) Legal Steps to get license: 1. First, decide which state, county, and city your company will operate in. On the SBA website, you may look up your state and city rules. 2. Make that you have your company's federal tax identification number (EIN). 3. Every sort of business has its own code, so be sure to know yours before applying for a business license. 4. Check to check whether you need a permit in addition to a business license, since certain types of enterprises require both. 5. Payment of the filing fee, which can range from $50 to $400 or more, is required. 6. Depending on the sort of business and the state, you may need to be fingerprinted. FIDR Analysis: US vs TBL LICENSING LLC, January 2022

Facts: Following VF Enterprises' acquisition of Timberland in 2011, a reorganization resulted in an intra-group transfer of ownership of important intangibles to TBL Investment Holdings, a Swiss entity. The IRS determined that the gains from the transfer were taxable.Reference of License tax cases(1866) was taken where in the defendant was charged with carrying on the business of retailing liquors without a license in Massachusetts, but the indictment was dismissed due to a demurrer. A statement of facts was agreed upon, stating that the defendant was a retail dealer as accused, and that the defendant's operation was illegal under Commonwealth law. And there was a split of view on the issue raised by the pleadings and this agreed statement. Issues: The general question in these cases was whether the defendants could be legally convicted on the various indictments found against them for failing to comply with the acts of Congress by taking out and paying for the required licenses to carry on the business in which they were engaged, despite the fact that such business was wholly prohibited by the laws of the various States in which it was carried on. Decision: The Court had determined that petitioner's constructive distribution of TBL GmbH stock to VF Enterprises in consideration for intangible property was a "disposition" within the meaning of section Licensing law. We also conclude that no aspect of the rules permits petitioner to avoid recognition of license under that statutory provision, for the reasons stated in law relating to license. Reason: However, it is correct to say that the 1866 statute was implemented after the past term's debates, and that Congress imposed these special taxes with the explicit awareness that some of the businesses so taxed were illegal by state law. This is conclusive evidence of the purpose. The theory we are requested to accept would invalidate several of the act's most basic provisions, and is thus unacceptable. The question requires a positive response.

Nexis Uni article in support: Legal resources for businesses

Business law necessitates paying close attention to changes in the legal landscape of licensing, implying that you must work smarter and quicker. Business start ups specializing in business law require the most up-to-date practical counsel, investigation tools, and reference materials in order to comprehend the continuously changing realm of corporate Licensing and taxation without the legalese and jargon. Licensing services, your go-to expert for all of your company law queries and demands, will transform your approach to challenges and streamline your process in the business world. With the help of authoritative practical information from practicing attorney writers across nine entity types, you can confidently advise your company or clients about licensing.

Recommendation analysis: You may choose to perform this yourself or outsource some or all of your licensing requirements, depending on your business needs. Full outsourcing, preparation and filing services, and research-only services are all choices for outsourcing. Business licensing software aids in the process' automation. In today's growing focus on compliance and transparency, keeping your compliance up to date helps to retain your excellent reputation, goodwill, and great public relations. It also prevents "paperwork" delays in the establishment of a new site or the expansion of products or services. License, permission, and registration requirements differ depending on the type of company or activity, and they may be enforced by municipal, state, or federal authorities. See the article, "Neglecting company licensing requirements may be expensive," for more information on the several sorts of licenses that are often required, as well as recommendations on how to handle these duties. Some governments have boosted enforcement measures against unauthorized enterprises in recent years. Financial and economic restrictions have also pushed some authorities to explore raising prices, introducing new types of permits, or a combination of the two. Maintaining compliance necessitates keeping track of renewals as well as adhering to any other restrictions or standards imposed by authorities. Adding new products or services, altering your entity's name or structure, and changing operational activities are all examples of events that might result in additional licensing obligations. When you expand geographically, you must consider any additional criteria, which may or may not be the same as those in your existing location. Each authority has its own set of rules for filling out paperwork and paying fees, licensing and taxes. This is usually taken into consideration by business licensing management software, which links entities with locations.

Legal Issue/Opportunity 2:

Intellectual property rights are a type of legal right that give creators of certain types of works the sole right to use, distribute, or profit from those works. These rights are designed to encourage creativity by providing financial incentives for creators to produce new works. There are four main types of intellectual property rights: Copyrights: Copyrights protect original works of authorship, such as books, movies, and musical compositions. Trademarks: Trademarks protect words, phrases, symbols, or designs that identify the source of goods or services. Patents: Patents protect inventions and give the inventor the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the invention. Trade secrets: Trade secrets are confidential information that provides a business with a competitive advantage. FIDR Analysis: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 563 U.S. 773 (2011) Facts: Apple and Samsung are two of the world's largest smartphone manufacturers. In 2010, Apple sued Samsung, alleging that Samsung's smartphones and tablets infringed on Apple's patents and trademarks. The case went to trial, and a jury found that Samsung had infringed on several of Apple's patents. The jury awarded Apple $1 billion in damages. Issue: Whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that Samsung did not infringe on Apple's trade dress. Decision: The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Federal Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Nexis Uni article in support: The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. has significant implications for the scope of trade dress protection in the United States. The Court held that trade dress is protectable under federal law even if it is not "inherently distinctive." The Court's decision expands the scope of trade dress protection and makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' unique designs. The Court's decision is significant because it overrules the "inherently distinctive" requirement for trade dress protection. Under the "inherently distinctive" requirement, trade dress was only protectable if it was "inherently distinctive" - that is, if it was capable of distinguishing the source of the product without the need for consumer awareness. The Court's decision makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' unique designs because it allows trade dress to be protected even if it is not "inherently distinctive." The Court's decision is also significant because it sets forth a new test for determining whether trade dress is "inherently distinctive." The Court held that the "inherently distinctive" test for trade dress is the same as the "inherently distinctive" test for trademarks. This new test makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' unique designs because it allows trade dress to be protected even if it is not "inherently distinctive."

Recommendation analysis: The Court's decision in Apple v. Samsung expands the scope of trade dress protection and makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' unique designs. The Court's decision is significant because it overrules the "inherently distinctive" requirement for trade dress protection. Under the "inherently distinctive" requirement, trade dress was only protectable if it was "inherently distinctive" - that is, if it was capable of distinguishing the source of the product without the need for consumer awareness. The Court's decision makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' unique designs because it allows trade dress to be protected even if it is not "inherently distinctive." The Court's decision is also significant because it sets forth a new test for determining whether trade dress is "inherently distinctive." The Court held that the "inherently distinctive" test for trade dress is the same as the "inherently distinctive" test for trademarks. This new test makes it easier for businesses to protect their products' Reason: The Federal Circuit's ruling was based on the principle that trade dress can only be protected if it is "inherently distinctive." The Supreme Court rejected this principle, holding that trade dress can be protected even if it is not "inherently distinctive." The Court also held that the test for whether trade dress is "inherently distinctive" is the same as the test for whether a trademark is "inherently distinctive."