BUS 3301 Columbia Southern University

Instructions

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper
Copyright Scenario
Jim Clark, an artist in Birmingham, submitted his logo design for the Birmingham Cougars football team, and the Cougars used a logo design that was very similar to Clark’s design for their team logo during the 1996–1998 seasons. Clark sued the Cougars for copyright infringement for using his design as their logo without his permission, and the court ruled that the Cougars had improperly used Clark’s design for their logo and had infringed on his copyright of that design.

The Cougars changed their logo for the 1999 season, but they started showing highlight films from their 1996–1998 seasons in their stadium, on their website, and on their television channel, and the logo that Clark had designed and that the Cougars had improperly used during those seasons appeared in the highlight films.

Clark sued the Cougars a second time, alleging that the appearance of the logo he designed in the highlight films was, again, copyright infringement.

The Cougars assert two defenses to Clark’s claim of copyright infringement the second time around.

The Cougars contended that their use of the 1996–1998 logo in the highlight films was protected by the fair use doctrine.

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

Since Clark and the Cougars were both citizens of Birmingham, there was no commerce among the states or interstate commerce involved, so Congress had no authority to make laws that protected Clark’s copyright.

  • In a two-page case study, address the questions below.
  • Is the Cougar’s use of the logo on the highlight films protected by the fair use doctrine?
  • Is the Cougar’s claim that Congress does not have the power to regulate copyright within a single state valid?

    As you answer these two questions about the Cougar’s use of the logo, explain how the evolution of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States affects businesses and the Cougars in particular. Also, be sure to address the categories of intellectual properties protected by the Constitution of the United States.

    UNIT II STUDY GUIDE
    The Constitution, Business, and Property
    Course Learning Outcomes for Unit II
    Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
    2. Interpret provisions of the Constitution of the United States related to businesses and property.
    2.1 Explain the importance of the evolution of the Commerce Clause in the Constitution of the
    United States.
    2.2 Discuss the categories of intellectual properties protected by the Constitution of the United
    States.
    Course/Unit
    Learning Outcomes
    2.1
    2.2
    Learning Activity
    Unit Lesson
    Chapter 5
    Article: “Statutory Interpretation – Commerce Clause”
    Unit II Case Study
    Unit Lesson
    Chapter 8
    Article: “Recent Developments in Intellectual Property Law[1]”
    Unit II Case Study
    Required Unit Resources
    Chapter 5: Constitutional Law
    Chapter 8: Real, Personal, and Intellectual Property
    In order to access the following resources, click the links below.
    Hawkins, D. (2018, July 11). Statutory interpretation – Commerce Clause. Wisconsin Law Journal.
    https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A546713092/ITOF?u=oran95108&sid=ITOF&xid=a28938cf
    Nichols, C. (2019). Recent developments in intellectual property law[1]. Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law
    Journal, 54(2), 615–629.
    https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
    t=true&db=asn&AN=137859269&site=ehost-live&scope=site
    Unit Lesson
    The Constitution of the United States
    When the Founding Fathers created the Constitution of the United States in 1787, they were not just trying to
    create something different; they were trying to create a structure for government and a legal system that
    addressed the deficiencies of the governments and legal systems that they knew in England and France. Of
    course, they had already set the course for a new government and legal system in the Declaration of
    Independence written 13 years before, but the details of government and the legal system of the new United
    States still had to be solidified in the new constitution.
    Looking back, we might be forgiven for thinking that the tasks that the writers faced must not have been too
    difficult since they did create a government and a legal system that has been successful for more than 200
    years, but the truth is that the task of creating a new government and legal system was difficult and
    BUS 3301, Business Law
    1
    controversial work and that, perhaps surprisingly, there was not universal approval
    the finalGUIDE
    document that
    UNIT of
    x STUDY
    became the Constitution of the United States.
    Title
    The Constitution of the United States is a comprehensive outline that creates a structure of government and a
    legal system, but it is an outline that has to be continually interpreted to address issues and situations that
    could not have been anticipated by the writers. The Constitution addresses many areas of government and
    the legal system, but naturally our focus in this course is on the provisions of the Constitution that affect
    business and property.
    The Commerce Clause
    The most important—or at least the most prominent—provision of the Constitution that affects business is the
    Commerce Clause found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which provides “Congress shall have the
    power … To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian
    Tribes” (U.S. Const. art. I, §8).
    This clause provides that the Congress of the United States has the authority to regulate commerce between
    the states. In other words, Congress, not the individual states, has the authority to enact laws that regulate
    business transactions between private businesses in different states. That authority is the basis for a broad
    range of federal laws that range from setting standards for the quality of products made in one state and sold
    in other states to prohibiting advertising of certain kinds of products, like tobacco products, that move in
    interstate commerce.
    For many years, the Commerce Clause was applied by the courts as it was written without any major
    interpretation. However, coinciding with the recovery after the Great Depression, the courts began to interpret
    the Commerce Clause more broadly so that the authority of Congress to regulate business transactions was
    extended to business transactions within a single state that had the potential to affect interstate commerce.
    An extreme example of the power of Congress to regulate business activities that were not interstate in nature
    but that were judged to have an effect on interstate commerce was the case of Wickard v. Filburn. In that
    case, a farmer, Filburn, grew wheat on his farm to feed the animals that he raised on that farm. There was a
    federal law that limited the amount of wheat that a farmer could grow, and when Filburn was found to have
    grown more wheat than the law allowed him to grow, a significant fine was assessed against him. Filburn
    objected to the fine, contending that the law limiting the amount of wheat that a farmer could grow should not
    apply to him because he did not sell the wheat in interstate commerce and used the wheat only to feed
    animals that he raised on his farm. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that while Filburn’s actions were local in
    nature and might not even be considered to be business activities, the law applied to those activities because
    the activities had an impact on interstate commerce. If Filburn had only grown what he was allowed to grow,
    he would have had to buy the additional wheat that he needed from other growers, and those growers might
    have been in other states, so by growing more than he was allowed to grow, Filburn potentially affected the
    amount of interstate commerce that might otherwise be expected (Wickard v. Filburn, 1942).
    The Dormant Commerce Clause
    Despite this expansion of the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, there are legitimate
    reasons for states to regulate commercial activity within the state. However, if a state’s regulation of
    commerce within the state has a negative impact on interstate commerce, courts must balance the state’s
    interests in regulating the commercial activity against the negative impact on interstate commerce; often,
    courts find that the state regulation of commerce within the state does not justify the impact on interstate
    commerce, and the state regulations are invalid because they conflict with Congress’s authority to regulate
    interstate commerce. The invalidation of state regulation of commercial activity within the state because the
    regulation conflicts with the Commerce Clause is often called the Dormant Commerce Clause.
    An extreme example of the application of the Dormant Commerce Clause doctrine is the case of Gonzales v.
    Raich. In that case, though California law allowed individuals to grow marijuana for personal medical use, the
    federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents destroyed marijuana plants being grown by Raich because
    marijuana was illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. Raich sued the United States, contending
    that her activities were legal under California law and that the destruction of the marijuana plants she was
    growing was illegal (Gonzales v. Raich, 2005). The U.S. Supreme Court, in what some thought was an
    BUS 3301, Business Law
    2
    illogical opinion, said that the federal Controlled Substance Act was a proper exercise
    of the authority
    UNIT x STUDY
    GUIDE of
    Congress under the Commerce Clause. The court said that the California law Title
    allowing Raich to grow
    marijuana for personal medical use conflicted with the Controlled Substance Act and that the Dormant
    Commerce Clause required that the California law, which allowed Raich to grow marijuana for personal
    medical use, be ruled as invalid, reasoning that if Raich did not grow marijuana for her own medical use, she
    would have had to buy the marijuana potentially in interstate trade (Gonzales v. Raich, 2005). The reason this
    train of thought is so illogical is, of course, because buying marijuana in interstate trade would be illegal.
    Other Constitutional Provisions Affecting Business
    There are other, less controversial provisions of the Constitution that affect business transactions. Article I,
    Section 10, Clause 1 of the Constitution provides, “No State shall … pass any … Law impairing the Obligation
    of Contracts” (U.S. Const. art. I, §10, Clause 1).
    In other words, the government cannot enact laws that change or invalidate private contracts that have
    already been made. It is a fairly rare occurrence that the government would have an interest in interfering with
    contracts made between private businesses, but it has happened a few times. In most cases under this
    Contracts Clause, the change in the terms of the contract are indirect.
    An example of a Contracts Clause case is Energy Reserve Group v. Kansas Power and Light. In that case,
    Kansas Power and Light had a long-term contract to buy natural gas from the Energy Reserve Group at a
    price that was tied to the federally established price for natural gas. During the term of the contract, the
    federal apparatus for establishing the price of natural gas was changed so that, though a federal price for
    natural gas was still established, states were allowed to set a price for natural gas that was lower than the
    federal price. The State of Kansas did establish a price for natural gas that was lower than the federal price,
    and when the Energy Reserve Group attempted to charge Kansas Light and Power the federal rate, Kansas
    Light and Power refused to pay more than the price set by the State of Kansas (Energy Reserve Group v.
    Kansas Power and Light, 1983). The Energy Reserve Group sued claiming that the federal regulations that
    allowed Kansas to set a price for natural gas that was less than the federal price and that the Kansas law did
    set a price lower than the federal price both violated the Contracts Clause because those laws impaired the
    existing contract between the Energy Reserve Group and Kansas Light and Power. The U.S. Supreme Court
    decided that, though the laws resulted in Kansas Light and Power being able to pay less for the natural gas
    supplied by the Energy Reserve Group than was expected under the contract, that result was justified by the
    interest of the State of Kansas in protecting consumers in Kansas from escalating natural gas prices (Energy
    Reserve Group v. Kansas Power and Light, 1983). Despite the fact that the law changed the terms of the
    contract between private parties, the change was justified by an overriding state interest.
    Often, in cases involving interpretation of constitutional provisions as they relate to business, there is a
    balancing of private business interests against legitimate state or federal interests that seem to conflict with
    those private business interests.
    When the Constitution was adopted, some of the Founding Fathers thought that it was incomplete because it
    did not contain a statement of the rights of the people that should be protected from government interference.
    That deficiency was corrected in 1791 when the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, called the Bill of
    Rights, were ratified. Most of the rights that are included in the Bill of Rights apply not only to individuals but
    also to organizations, including business organizations, but a few of those rights have special applications to
    business. For example, the Fifth Amendment provides that private property shall not be taken for public use
    without due compensation paid to the owner of that property. Over the years, there have been questions
    about what taking private property for “public use” means and how “due compensation” is determined.
    Though the interpretation of those concepts continues to evolve, it is clear that government cannot
    involuntarily take privately owned property except to be used for a legitimate public purpose and only if the
    private owner is paid for that property.
    BUS 3301, Business Law
    3
    Protection of Intellectual Property
    UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
    Title
    Another constitutional provision that relates to property is Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution,
    which authorizes Congress “to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times
    to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries” (U.S. Const. art. I, §8,
    Clause 8).
    This provision is the basis for intellectual property protection in the United States. The concept of intellectual
    property is probably broader now than it was in 1789, and it now includes the copyrights and patents that
    were probably contemplated by the Founding Fathers but also trademarks and even trade dress and trade
    secrets. Each of these categories of intellectual properties are afforded some protection under federal and
    state laws, ranging from registration of the copyrights, patents, and trademarks to laws that provide how
    intellectual properties can be protected from infringement. Despite the protections provided for intellectual
    properties, exceptions have developed that allow the use of certain intellectual property in limited situations
    without the permission of the owner of that property. For example, the fair use doctrine allows the limited use
    of copyrighted and trademarked material for specific purposes without the consent of the owner of the
    copyright or trademark. One example of this is when passages from a copyrighted book are quoted in a
    review or criticism of that book. Another common application of the fair use doctrine is the use of limited
    amounts of copyrighted material used in teaching a class.
    Conclusion
    Although the Constitution was written more than 230 years ago, it addresses two areas that are important for
    businesses today: commerce and intellectual property. Though the primary responsibility for promoting and
    protecting commerce and protecting intellectual property is assigned to the federal government, there are still
    opportunities for states to be involved in these areas that are important to businesses.
    References
    Energy Reserve Group v. Kansas Power and Light, 459 U.S. 400 (1983).
    Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005).
    U.S. Const. art. I, §8
    U.S. Const. art. I, §8, Clause 8
    U.S. Const. art. I, §10, Clause 1
    Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942).
    BUS 3301, Business Law
    4
    Learning Activities (Nongraded)
    UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
    Title
    Nongraded Learning Activities are provided to aid students in their course of study. You do not have to submit
    them. If you have questions, contact your instructor for further guidance and information.
    View the Unit II Glossary to review key terms presented in this
    unit.
    Alternate format for Unit II Glossary
    (Photogl, n.d.)
    Reference
    Photogl. (n.d.). Books on library shelves (ID 20785201) [Photograph]. Dreamstime.
    https://www.dreamstime.com/stock-image-books-library-shelves-image20785201
    BUS 3301, Business Law
    5

    Still stressed from student homework?
    Get quality assistance from academic writers!

    Order your essay today and save 25% with the discount code LAVENDER