Question

chapter 15 you decide part i - choose your path: intellectual property fraud question 1 question 2 what would you do? question 3 question 4 what would you do? the requests for permission to use the songs that went unanswered may or may not be important factors in this case; it is just not clear whether or not it will affect the trial, the judgment, and the punishment. the issue raised is whether the use of the songs for promotional purposes and during the event itself constitutes intellectual property fraud. the event organizers, when questioned by your team, insist that they had no plan to use any of the songs from the artists who wrote or called back saying “no” to the requests. the organizers do feel, though, that those requests that didn’t get answered should be viewed as quasi “yesses by default.” in other words, the event promoters feel that not denying the request should be the same as granting permission. they contend that they would not have invested the time and money in the promotion of this large - scale event had they been told “no” by all or even most of the artists to whom they sent permission requests. as the prospective prosecuting attorney, you must also consider all of the facts in the case and also anticipate that new mitigating and/or aggravating facts may arise during the course of the case. based on all the information you have, do you still consider these promotions and the concert event itself to represent intellectual property fraud? yes, although any additional new evidence may change this. probably not, because the unanswered requests for permission signaled, in their absence, a quasi “permission by default.”

Explanation:

Intellectual property rights require explicit permission. Lack of response does not equal consent. Absence of a 'no' is not the same as a 'yes' in legal - rights contexts. New evidence could potentially alter the conclusion, but based on standard legal principles regarding intellectual property, the current situation likely represents fraud.

Answer:

Yes, although any additional new evidence may change this.