Case study on Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands,
Facts of the case.
In the case between the Star Athletica and Varsity Brands, disputes in design copyrights arise. Varsity Brands is a company which mainly deals with the making of fabric used in different athletic activities. The design procedure followed is that colour, models and dimensions are strictly adhered to. The use made on the final product is not put into considerations. It had secured copyright registration for two manufacturing designs similar to the ones which Star Athletica had started to use. Varsity brands claimed that the Star Athletica, the ones being accused, had not adhered to copyright Act of 1976. Star Athletica defended their opinion by arguing that Varsity Brands had made corrupted presentations to the copyright authorities over non-copyrighted designs. The designs herein are argued by the plaintiff that they could be separated from the attires which the star Athletica held that they could not be separated what so ever. The Sixth Circuit ruling party ruled that Copyright act authorized companies to have the copyright to design even if it is not separable.
The decision of the court over the matter
Due to the escalated dispute over the two companies, the matter was forwarded to the U.S Supreme Court for further hearing and decision making. The court, in a majority vote, ruled that production permit is allowed if the content included in the scheme procedures of a useful article; can be taken as a double or triple mode of production (Miller, 2010). The other ruling made in regards to the copyright protection was that, other than being dimensional, the copyright can qualify as a preventive measure for graphical arts independently or relying on other mediums of expression. This ruling is backed by the fact that the useful article can be separated from the material it is included in. The court affirmed that the designs were copyrightable.
In my opinion, the ruling made was fair and just. This is supported by the fact that designs in every aspect can be copied as long as the personalized effect is not tarnished. Varsity brands had their standards set clean in that the copyright they had acquired for their production did not hold much to the use made on their final products (Miller, 2010). Had their permit limited the use of the final product, the defendants could not have received justice in the ruling. This is due to that fact that unequal market competition could set into the disadvantages of the Star Athletica. Another reason backing why the ruling was is that the designs employed by the Varsity brands, which included; striping designs and colour patterns used could be separated from the uniforms. Again, their designs qualified to two dimensional according to section 101 of the Copyright Act.
To save the defendant from the extremes of the court decision, various arbitrating ways could have been used before having the case forwarded to the court authorities. The defendant could have considered having marketing and production terms aired on the grounds to the plaintiff (Vissak, 2010). Star Athletica could have considered having mutual agreement on how the product could be channelled between the two brands. Matters to have been agreed mutually would include; the colours both brands would use in their productions, the number of stripes to be made in the uniforms and the position of placing logos in their uniform.
Further to this, the defendant could have considered reading about the legitimate ways of securing copyright permits. In so doing, the defendant would have been enlightened on the possible ways through which copyright designs could be copyrighted lawfully. The plaintiff would also have considered joining hands with the defendant. This is because they had incorporated production designs which the defendants were already using. This move would have created a more harmonious production and increase the production output. The defendant could also have opted to change their products. Instead of making the whole uniform, they could agree on one company to produce the t-shirts while the other company produces shorts alongside other attires (Curtis, & Turley,2007). The production market offers unlimited ventures, and this would be the option to the defendant. This case results has an impact on the business goodwill. Business goodwill plays a crucial role in the operations of any given company. A loss in the goodwill consecutively poses a significant threat to the subject company (Glum, Landsman & Wyrwa, 2018). In the case above, the business goodwill of the defendant was negatively affected. It was affected in that their chances of joining hands in production with the plaintiff were altered during the case period.
To sum the above case, it is evident that good market relation is crucial in production. The defendant loses in the case for lack of proper knowledge on how to secure the copyright of producing similar commodities. The ruling made opens up the bridging gap in acquiring production permits and creates awareness of the legitimate ways of having merging production rights.
References
Curtis, E., & Turley, S. (2007). The business risk audit–A longitudinal case study of an audit engagement. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(4-5), 439-461.
Fleisch, E., Weinberger, M., & Wortmann, F. (2015). Business models and the internet of things. In Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions for the Internet of Things (pp. 6-10). Springer, Cham.
Glaum, M., Landsman, W. R., & Wyrwa, S. (2018). Goodwill impairment: The effects of public enforcement and monitoring by institutional investors. The accounting review, 93(6), 149-180.
Miller, C., 2010. 5 Recent Supreme Court Decisions That Could Affect Your Business. [online] Blog.concannonmiller.com. Available at: <https://blog.concannonmiller.com/4thought/5-recent-supreme-court-decisions-that-could-affect-your-business> [Accessed 12 August 2020].
Vissak, T. (2010). Recommendations for using the case study method in international business research. Qualitative Report, 15(2), 370-388.
