Q1

Alvin, Bob, Calvin, Don and Edgar are friends in Australia who enrol in a university course to study international business law. The textbook required for the course costs $142.95, which the five friends agree is expensive, They agree to chip in $28.59 each and buy one copy from a bookstore. They then take the copy to the local Discount Copy Store and make five copies of the complete book for $15 a copy. Then they return the book to the bookstore and get a refund of their original purchase price. Have the five friends done anything wrong? If so, what? Explain. How would your answer differ if the conduct happened in the United States (US)?

Q3

The First-to-Market Computer Software Company (First-to-Market) owns the copyright in Australia to a highly successful spreadsheet program - Blossom 3-2-1 - which has dominated the worldwide market for several years. Recently, Clone Software Company (Clone) devised a look-alike program that does everything that the Blossom 3-2-1 program does. The Clone look-alike program sells for only one-tenth the price of the original Blossom 3-2-1 program. First-to-Market has sued Clone for copyright infringement. Clone defends itself by saying that the coding of its program is entirely different from that of the Blossom 3-2-1 program, and that the only similarity between the programs is that the images that appear on the computer screen and the key sequences used to operate the program are identical. Has Clone infringed First-to-Market's copyright? Explain. How would your answer differ if the conduct happened in the United States (US)?

Q4

The Whopper Co is a company that manufacturers gumballs. The technology and know how to do this are well known in the scientific and engineering community in Whopper Co's home country, where gumballs have been popular with consumers for decades.Tutorial 05 of 2021 Whopper Co decided recently to expand into Country X and to introduce gumballs to a market that has never seen them before. Before doing so, Whopper Co filed for a patent in Country X. The local patent office examined the application as to form (it was fine), searched the local records to determine if the technology was known locally (it was not), and then published notice of the application in the Patent Gazette for public comment. There was no public comment, and the patent was issued. Now a company Bubble Co, a local business in Country X, has begun manufacturing and selling gumballs in Country X that are identical to those being manufactured and sold by Whopper Co. Whopper Co brings suit for patent infringement. Bubble Co countersues to have Whopper Co's patent revoked. Who will win?

Q6

Barley Beer Co owns the trade mark "Super Suds" for use on bottled and canned beer in Country X. Barley Beer Co has not used the trade mark in Country X for six years. Hops Beer Co would like to use the trade mark, and it brings suit in a Country X Court to have Barley Beer Co's trade mark revoked. Will Hops Beer Co succeed?

Q7

A Japanese company, Omega Co, manufactures cassette tapes with the trade mark "TXX". Omega Co licensed Alpha Co to distribute and sell the cassette tapes in Australia and Sigma Co to do the same in South Africa. The license with Sigma Co expired after three years, and Omega Co refused to renew the license. Sigma Co then began buying cassette tapes from Alpha Co in Australia in bulk quantities and importing them into South Africa. These cassette tapes had no individual wrappers or labels, and Sigma Co affixed both wrappers and labels with the TXX trademark on the cassette tapes, which it then sold throughout South Africa. Omega Co, which owns the TXX trademark in South Africa, has brought suit to enjoin Sigma Co from importing the cassette tapes into South Africa. Will Omega Co succeed? Would it make any difference if Omega Co's license with Alpha forbade Alpha from selling cassette tapes for export to South Africa?