A recipe, insofar as it consists of a list of ingredients and of instructions for what to do with
them, cannot be copyrighted. A recipe can conceivably be kept secret as a trade secret. If a
published recipe contains anecdotes or other literary additions that are not really part of the
recipe, the anecdotes etc. can be copyrighted, as literary expression, but the list of
ingredients and the cooking instructions are merely information, and information cannot be
copyrighted. . However, a compilation of recipes can be copyrighted. Thus, it would be
illegal to copy a recipe book that is under copyright. Ohio State University's trademark and
licensing program reportedly brings the University over $12.5 million annually and is a
crucial means of revenue that is dependent upon. I can reminder being at my sons
graduation and hearing "THE Ohio State University" with the three-letter word "The" being
stated with such confidence and grit behind it. Recently, The Ohio State University
successfully accomplished a trademark for the word "The". They have been working to
accomplish this since 2019 to be used specifically on their athletic apparel. Initially their
request to trademark this word through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was denied as
well as an identical request submitted by fashion designer Marc Jacobs. However, the
approval included an agreement between both Ohio State and Jacobs to both use "The" on
their apparel and products. The request was first denied by the USPTO because it didn't
seem to be me the requirements of distinctiveness. It was determined that nothing about it
was differentiating from anything else. However Ohio State was able to justify and prove
its distinction from others with the use of the word "The".Having this trademark protection
is important to them because it allows them to progressively continue to set themselves
apart and bring in an outstanding revenue through the selling of sports wear that is labeled
with the addition of one word that makes them so important and prestigious. When you add
"The" it can give the perception of the best which is how they want their student, athletes,
and fans to feel and relate to them. Disney is undeniably known for its channels, films, and
amusement parks but it doesn't stop there, Disney is a brand. Under that brand, there is a
myriad of characters within the company; these animations are intellectual properties
themselves. Meaning that other production companies are unable to replicate these
characters and storylines under their name and make money off of it. That being said
Disney ensures that no other company will profit off of their creations. Whether it be their
manuscripts of movies or the designs for their logos. This is why they are working hard to
protect it.For example, these properties have recently been debated over; between Sony and
Disney. "It’s no secret that Sony Pictures own the film rights to Spider-Man and that their
current deal with Marvel expires with Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021). It’s also no
secret that The Walt Disney Company prizes Spidey like their favorite child and attempted
to gain more rights to the character in 2019 but ultimately renegotiated their new terms".In
the end, Sony still owns spiderman and is unwilling to sell it to Disney because it occurs a
big portion of its profit, instead they decided to collaborate on the next film and split profits
70/30. Protecting their intellectual property is so important to them because they have
invested millions of dollars into each of their movies. By far their biggest and most know is
Mickey Mouse. When you think of Disney you probably picture him or at least his ears. He
is their biggest and most expensive intelleNike has intellectual property which is the Nike
check symbol that is their trademark. Anything involving Nike you will see that check mark
symbol. It has been their trademark for as long as I can remember. They use trademarks to
protect their brand. By having a trademark a company can prevent unauthorized use of their
intellectual property. "Just Do It" is another trademark of Nike. Good thing they trademark
these things because if not another company could use them for marketing purposes. I read
that Nike has a total of 25,762 patents globally. Trademarks protect names, copyrights
protects a companies original work, and patents are more on the scientific side of things. It
is important for a company to protect their intellectual property so that things they have
worked hard for cannot be taken and used for marketing for other companies. I believe it
also. helps with their assets by protecting their intellectual property. Without protection
their ideas and other things of the company would not reap their full benefits i believe.ctual
property. They have copyright over him so that no other company can use him or anything
that might be mistaken as him in anything. Disney protects their intellectual property
because without they don’t make as much money. They are the only ones able to sell
Mickey Mouse or Frozen or any other major film characters. Because of this they make
billions of dollars yearly. Intellectual property is pretty much listed on most business
products such as pictures, flyers, and products of that particular company. I know when my
son has his pictures taken you will get the preview but will have copyright words written
across until actual purchase. Years ago my daughter was friends with a girl whose family
had an idea patented but Polaris stole it, they were able to sue for damages and made out
very well with the lawsuit. a Intellectual property needs to be of importance for businesses to
protect any products they may offer that make them their profit. Should someone else be
able to just take over other ideas then they may be able to steal the profits from the original
owner as to why the intellectual property rights are so important.Should a business have a
patent, copyrights, etc they become protected. As I stated earlier a lawsuit for a patent that
was stolen without a legal contract, can be done by hiring an attorney that practices
Intellectual law. I feel small businesses are more prone to having issues with other
businesses trying to make a quick dollar off someone else's ideas. Hopefully, the smaller
business take more action and pay close attention to their rights for a product that may be
their original idea. Google has intellectual property rights to many of their innovative
evolution aspects of societies and communities down to the source code of their website
configurations. With the advancement of technology so does the advancement evolution of
laws that govern intellectual property need to be updated for the rights of individuals,
entities, and companies. “In Google v. Oracle, the Supreme Court found Google’s use of
11,500 lines of declaring code was fair use” (R, D., Wizenfeld, H., & Cole, D.,
12/03/2021). This seems to be unfair in my cognition. Perhaps the data software should be
considered like artwork, lyrics from music, or solar power converters that are intellectually
protected creations by copyrights, trademarks, and/or patents. “Determining the purpose of
software code may be a simpler task than determining the purpose of visual artwork”
.Protecting intellectual property is important in general principalities for the creator
(inventors) to have executive control over the “mission” and “vision” of the concepts
protected by patents, copyrights, and trademarks. To my cognition, if Google didn’t take
precautions of protecting its intellectual property the company would lose the nurturing of
originality and their market from distinguishing their own products and services from
others. The company would not be able to reap the full benefits of their inventions and
would enable a space for other competitors to legally sell inventions and/or concepts with
comparable configuration and the quality of having a practical use of creation would be
lost. You're spot on about laws needing to keep pace with the advancement of technology.
Legislation seems to be constantly playing catch up as technology rapidly evolves in
everything we do.I lack technical knowledge as it relates to specifics of computer coding,
but I think you've laid out some valid points in the basis of your argument, comparing code
to artwork and other technological developments that may be protected. I didn't realize code
that creates or designs specific software capabilities or functions couldn't be protected. I
would think certain proprietary code would fall under the umbrella of software protections.
Google is very well known and makes a great deal of money. Because of this they have
they pay for the intellectual property rights of all of their technology. They trademarked
their name “Google” as well as their color, design and layout of their brand. They created
many things that stemmed from their original search engine. They now have the intellectual
rights for gmail as well as YouTube. You are right that if google didn’t take precautions in
protecting their intellectual property right they could the originality of their company and as
well as a lot of money. I believe that states that limit enforceable of Non-Compete
Agreements are due to there being so much these days that could be taken out of content.
Like in my response discussion this week with Google source code easily being able to
copied and used by another company. What intellectual property rights or non-compete
agreements need to be in place with such ease of technology to copy them. My idea is law
and rights language may need to be updated to embody such rights.
