Assignment 2 Lasa 1: Legal And Ethical Leadership And 554889

Assignment 2 Lasa 1 Legal And Ethical Leadership And Managementmathi

Research business law in regard to protection of intellectual property using your textbook, the Argosy University online library resources, and the Internet. Based on the facts of the case and research, write an analytical paper. In the paper, respond to the following questions: Was it ethical for Normandale to sell the alleged knock-off products at a lower price? Explain.

What federal or state laws protect owners of intellectual property? How do they apply here? Explain. What damages, if any, has Mathis suffered because of Normandale’s conduct? Explain.

What are the differing views on the social responsibility of corporations like Normandale? What ethical code could Normandale implement to prevent similar incidents in the future? Do the owners of Normandale have personal liability to Mathis for damages? Explain. Do the owners of Normandale have personal criminal liability for their conduct and that of the business?

Paper For Above instruction

In this paper, I will analyze the legal and ethical considerations surrounding Normandale’s actions in selling counterfeit products identical to those of Mathis, Inc., and assess the implications based on business law regarding intellectual property rights. The case presents significant issues about the legality and morality of Normandale’s conduct, and a thorough exploration of relevant laws, damages suffered by Mathis, and the ethical responsibilities of corporations like Normandale is essential.

Normandale's decision to sell counterfeit products at a lower price raises critical questions of ethics and legality. From an ethical perspective, the act of selling knock-off products infringes on the rights of original creators and damages the integrity of fair competition. Ethically, it is unjustified for Normandale to profit from copying another company's designs without authorization, as it undermines innovation and the effort that goes into designing original clothing.

Legally, multiple federal statutes protect intellectual property owners, notably the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act) and the Copyright Act. The Lanham Act prohibits the use of trademarks or similar marks that are likely to cause confusion among consumers. In this case, because Normandale’s counterfeit products display Mathis labels and resemble the original designs, they infringe on Mathis’s trademark rights under the Lanham Act. The Copyright Act similarly protects original designs against unauthorized copying, making Normandale’s act potentially illegal under copyright law if the designs qualify for copyright protection.

Mathis has suffered substantial damages due to Normandale’s conduct. Financially, the counterfeit sales cut into Mathis’s market share and profit margins. Additionally, the brand reputation of Mathis could be compromised if consumers associate counterfeit products with the original brand, weakening consumer trust and brand value. The nearly $3 million gross profit increase for Normandale underscores the significant economic harm inflicted on Mathis.

Views on the social responsibility of corporations such as Normandale vary widely. Some advocate that corporations should prioritize profit maximization within legal boundaries, while others believe that ethical responsibilities include respecting intellectual property rights and avoiding unfair competition. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) entails behaving ethically and fostering sustainable practices. Normandale could adopt an ethical code emphasizing compliance with intellectual property laws, integrity in business practices, and respect for innovation to prevent future infringements.

Regarding personal liability, owners of Normandale may be held accountable for damages if they personally authorized or participated in the infringing conduct. Under certain circumstances, especially if personal misconduct or negligence can be proven, owners could be liable for damages awarded to Mathis. Criminal liability is also possible if the counterfeit activities are prosecuted under laws that criminalize intellectual property theft, such as the Criminal Copyright Infringement statute, which could lead to fines or imprisonment for individuals involved.

In conclusion, Normandale’s sale of counterfeit products not only breaches legal protections of intellectual property but also raises serious ethical concerns. The company’s actions result in tangible damages to Mathis, undermine fair competition, and conflict with the principles of corporate social responsibility. Both legal accountability and personal liability for owners depend on their involvement and adherence to laws protecting intellectual property rights. Therefore, implementing an ethical corporate culture emphasizing compliance and respect for intellectual property rights is crucial to prevent future infringements and uphold integrity in business operations.

References

• contention, M., & Levine, S. (2020). Business Law: Text and Cases. Pearson.
• Wald, M. (2019). Intellectual Property Law and Practice. Wolters Kluwer.
• U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2021). Trademark Basics. https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics
• U.S. Copyright Office. (2022). Copyright Law of the United States. https://www.copyright.gov/title17/
• Boatright, J. R. (2018). Ethics and the Conduct of Business. Pearson.
• Carroll, A. B. (2016). Business and Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholding. Cengage Learning.
• Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The New York Times Magazine.
• American Bar Association. (2020). Guidelines for Corporate Ethical Conduct. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/
• Levie, H. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility and Intellectual Property Rights. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 9(2), 50–60.
• Gao, Y. (2021). Ethical Implications of Counterfeit Goods. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(4), 823–837.