i want answer on this please helpMastercard v. Strengthen Democracy Now

In 1999, Mastercard launched its long-running advertising campaign called "Priceless." Both the print and television ads feature images along with a narrative of related things one can buy, followed by the one item that cannot be purchased that is described as "priceless." The ads always end with the line: "There are some things money can't buy.For everything else there's MasterCard." Mastercard did not copy this ad from anyone else; they originated this concept. These Mastercard ads have been running for several years, and they are very well known.

In one widely circulated print advertisement, for example, a father and son are attending a baseball game. The text of the advertisement reads: "Two tickets: $40. Two hot dogs, two pretzels, and two sodas: $19. An autographed baseball: $60. An afternoon with your ten-year old son: Priceless. There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's MasterCard."

"Strengthen Democracy Now" (SDN) is a non-profit organization dedicated to curbing the influence of money in political campaigns. After Mastercard began running its Priceless ads, SDN decided to use it as a model for running a series of print ads in national newspapers to highlight the need for campaign finance reform and educate the public on this issue. SDN's ad shows a picture of a lavish campaign event, and the ad text reads: "Lobster and filet mignon for a fundraising dinner: $2500 a plate. Campaign ads filled with lies and half-truths: $25 million. Promises to special interest groups: $10 billion. Getting big money out of American politics: Priceless. There are some things money can't buy. Unless we enact comprehensive campaign finance reform, the truth will come in last." While SDN solicits donations for its non-profit organization, it has not seen an increase in donations after running these advertisements.

Mastercard has sued SDN for copyright infringement in a federal court in New York. Mastercard has not suffered a decrease in sales or any other economic damages as a result of SDN's ad campaign. Mastercard seeks an injunction from the court, ordering SDN to stop running these advertisements that are modeled on the "Priceless" campaign. Mastercard properly registered its copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office before bringing this lawsuit.

The federal copyright statute includes the following sections:

17 U.S. Code 102 - Subject matter of copyright: In general

(a) Copyright protection subsists, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device....

(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

17 U.S. Code 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work, . . . for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Instructions: SDN has hired your law firm, and you are the law associate who has been tasked with assessing the strength of Mastercard's case against your client. Using the FIRAC model, analyze whether Mastercard is likely to succeed in a copyright infringement lawsuit against SDN. As part of your analysis, be sure to discuss the following: (1) whether Mastercard has satisfied the requirements for obtaining a copyright, (2) whether Mastercard can show copyright infringement against SDN, and (3) whether SDN is likely to raise and win any defense(s).

FIRAC Paper Directions: Because you are only focusing on the specific copyright issues listed above, you SHOULD NOT discuss any other legal issues, such as: whether the federal district court in New York has subject matter jurisdiction; whether the court has personal jurisdiction over the parties; whether SDN was properly served with notice of the lawsuit; whether Mastercard's lawsuit falls within the statute of limitations.

"""Introduction; just start your paper with the FACTS heading"""

FACTS:

ISSUE:

RULE:

APPLICATION:

CONCLUSION:

Skip questionStart answeringExit