Case Study

THE MANAGER,

P-HOUSE PRODUCTS CORP.

SQUIRRELTOWN, TN.

Dear Mr. Carbon,

The El Paso Corporation notes with a lot of concern the infringement of copyright ownership by P-House Product Corporation. The company is marketing her products through the Crossroads Program whose Brainchild is the Bridge Program developed by our company. The Bridge Program has been in existence since 2005 and lawfully registered under the companies’ law. Therefore, using the same strategy to sell products no matter how different they are is a criminal offense punishable by law. The mentioning of the Bridge Program in a publication meant for the sale of Crossroads Program products without permission from our organization infringes the ownership property rights. The El Paso Corporation has in hand marketing leaflets from your company that quotes the Bridge Program in a manner that suggests that the crossroads Program is a sister project of ours. This is defamatory and is an attempt to mislead the public for personal gains.

In addition, the use of our product name, as witnessed by online publications available on your website and internet comments posted by various customers, is enough evidence to file a case against your company. In view of the above, the El Paso Company demands an apology and termination of the advertisements that quote our Bridge Program to avoid legal action against your company. Given that your company has been enjoying sales through wrongful use of our ideas, El Paso expects compensation for the same. The El Paso gives you a chance to settle the case out of court in order to protect your reputation by your company replying to this letter. It should also show commitment to compensate for the dames caused so far. Failure to do so will necessitate the El Paso Corporation to seek for legal settlement of the case.

Yours Sincerely,

Tasha Brooks,

Assistant Manager,

The El Paso Corporation.

The letter to the manager of P-House Product Company, Mr. Reno Carbon aims to bring to his attention the illegal practices that his company has been undertaking. It further informs Mr. Carbon that our program has been in existence before the introduction of their Crossroads product. The existence of our program serves to convince him that they are the duplicators of our ideas and given that, we have a trademark and copyright lawfully. Given that the company does not have any knowledge of the contents contained in our terms and conditions of our copyright, is enough to intimidate him to fear a legal pursuit against his company.

The fact that El Paso Company has documented evidence against P-House, serves right to make Mr. Carbon to be willing to end the matter without raising eyebrows. Mr. Carbon is a peaceful loving individual and hates having legal scandals in a bid to protect his reputation, the mention of a legal suit is unwelcome. By taking the alternative of settling the case out of court, he could save himself charges of hiring a lawyer. In the end, our company will gain tremendously since our lawyer is expensive at the rate of $350 per hour and other charges adding up to $ 475.

In case the P-House company does not comply, the letter serves as evidence in a court of law that we had informed them earlier but they opted to ignore. Using the letter, it will give us an upper hand in the industrial when the judges give their ruling. In this context, it will be possible for the El-Paso Corporation to decide on the amount of compensation and ask the P-House company to pay the legal fee used. In conclusion, the strategy is ideal and likely to bear fruits.