BLB3129: Intellectual Property Law - Jenny Case Study - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

Intellectual Property Law

1. Jenny is an experienced Human Resources Officer for Perth University and her employer has asked her to draft a completely new Staff Handbook. When she drafted this, she used a template that she had from her previous employer, the University of Mars (‘UoM’), which was 100 pages long which she and two other UoM staff had drafted. She then made the following changes to the UoM template: 

• deleted five pages which were not relevant to Perth University; 

• included five new pages and added language required by statutes; 

• added two pages from other agreements, some of which she had authored and which were publicly available on the Internet to other Australian universities; 

• created three new pages to cover complex new legal rights for employees over the age of 65 years; 

• edited all of the above for style and consistency; 

• made a large number of minor stylistic and grammatical revisions suggested by Mr Pickwick, the Head of Human Resources for Perth University. The resulting Staff Handbook is about 105 pages long and is published on the University’s intranet, accessible to all staff. Several months later, Jenny’s line manager Mr Pickwick calls her into his office for a meeting together with the university’s in-house legal officer. Mr Pickwick informs Jenny that a letter has been received from her former employer claiming that Perth University has breached the copyright subsisting in the UoM Staff Handbook and must cease its use or agree to pay a licence fee. Advise Perth University as to whether there is any basis for the claim of copyright infringement and any defences it may have. (25 marks) 

2. During a period of unemployment in 2019 Jackie made an original design of a milkshake maker for use in cafes. She kept a copy of her design on her home computer and also had hardcopies of the design in her portfolio folder. In 2020 she accepted a position as a designer with CafeKing Ltd. In this role she produced three new versions of the milkshake maker. It was clear that these subsequent milkshake makers were evolved from Jackie’s original 2019 design. In other words, all subsequent designs were derivatives of the original master design. Unfortunately, Jackie never applied to register her original design. CafeKing Ltd has since made over $1 million profit from Australian sales of the new design of the milkshake maker. Does Jackie have any intellectual property rights she can rely in order to negotiate to license CafeKing Ltd for its use of her design? Advise Jackie.

This BLB3129: Law Assignment has been solved by our Law Experts at onlineassignmentbank. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.

Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.