1. explain what is this case study about?

2. answer case study questions that are in picture.

wowe More CASE 12.2 Protecting Intellectual Property: Elvis's Memory and Intellectual Property Live On Web www.vis.com Facebook: Elvis Presley Twitter Elvis Presley Bruce Banglahoma State University R. Dund. TM University Introduction documentary, Freis doctrine in US c Sawy owner of actual property w ways on he lookout for people who tinge on the without roung persion from the control, property and action when necessary. From hower. The following protected under the 2002 2005, the played out in anul involving a company named Paper Video and the Quotation of the copyrighted work for review or opyrigos and is produced by the ricor in a horrect work Una prody or stre woration in a news report Alleged Copyright Violation Reproduction by a teacher or a student of all part of the work on Duis afectionately known as "The King of rock and nodoroduction of a work in death on August 16, 1877. During his career is wa or broadcast of an event being reported very profe, and a wide variety of people on the copy Reproduction of a work in a live si video de 2002. Porno Videos Video, a video production company produced a video ocumentary, which included sight DVDs and 16 hours to 10 percent of the length of the videos contained video, locured on wysect of the and was copyright material performing many of which were in fom US The Decision, the Appead the proyed and owned by Duis Presley Er ethers. The most a home Decision movie owned by Elvis Presley Enterprise Atesting to both the US. Dit Courried The Ed Sin Show and portion of divanin tover of the plaints saying that write didn't Brain Concert, which included songs written by Jerry out the planets did not concert tour production med Peport Video that they objected to the pro Perscort persisted appealing the decision to the who.caucht wieder reproduction of the veheplats ruction of the videos, Pampor Video persiste, indi Ninth Crout Court of Roces, puing that is doo y asked for a preliminary Hunction stepping 2005 ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals die Passport Video from a more copies of the spread and timed the wing of the lower court. In and those that with to profit from a very much Passports en The court found that Port docum was for commercial use rather than scholarly Passport moured dates, claiming that we of although the commercial are of the project was not e copyrighted material was tore and the the decling factor instead, the extent to which the Copyrighted materw was used ipped the decision WAT . GNOMIC GROWING AN ENTREPRENEURAL. POR dedo de protect the legal owners of visite notice that coming for use is and is not able naming in its decision the the lower court Por use of cofron although in most confortion were dumnes roughout the While ingawal um oferecer dowdow way no longer anato graphical purpose. Accome of the were not short inferiore ce on The Steve Allen Showplay broer a minute and more for more Asta w seconds The wing bored portion sing wyd tional cool The Definities outlined the limits of the defense Subothering, the United District Court in Los Angela Elvis Presley Enterprise SOFA Erronment and songwriters Laber and Stor 128 million in monetary damage and women to be paid by Passport and its owner, Dar Pugliese aber and Srowote"Hound Dog and Other Elvis. The was considered to be significant monetary gent for a copyrighting haly to hold water when wed in conjunction with schol wly work or can comercial Discussion Questions 12-47. Do you want 12- Why do you think the copyright holders 12-9. Do you report Video tedy and honestly and that production protected by or do you think them simply waingowy of avoiding yod material was 12-40. What cases wherested in the Source and Online Upper See by the Cartomanther