Yours is a very fact intensive scenario, but it sounds as if there is some serious confusion regards to trademark law.
There are definitely some tactics you can employ assuming you were using the mark first even if you made no federal registration, but this is something you need to discuss with a lawyer in private first to all the facts are clear. I would also want to make sure that the mark in question is actually protectable and not merely descriptive or generic.
Further, whenever you...
You should have already created a separate entity to house this business because there is no legal distinction between a DBA and the underlying person or entity that controls it. If one channel of business if exposed in some way then everything is exposed. Usually, when the business activity is very different as you described here you should form a proper entity to operate it through.
I suggest that you consult with a lawyer in private and discuss your specific objectives in more detail....
I am really not sure what you are asking here. The court doesn't manage the company but rather appoints one when receivership is warranted.
If this is in some way affecting you o your business you need to consult a lawyer in private and discuss your options.
You can start by calling around to several for a free phone consultation, get some insights then pick the best fit to work with.
In short, adding or taking away the word "of" would not do anything to affect the trademark analysis. That is, it would still be infringing assuming the mark is protectable. The example you offered, for example, would be a moot point because that is utterly descriptive. Assuming your mark is registered on the Principal Register, however, and not the Supplemental, we can assume that you do not have a descriptiveness issue.
You really need to get a proper analysis done and if they are...
What you are saying really, is that you believe your teacher perpetrated a copyright infringement on this author.
This may be, but it is not a criminal matter, rather it could be a civil action. You, however, have no standing and would not have any claims here. If you are troubled by this, perhaps you can anonymously tip off an administrator at your school that can conduct their own investigation.
Normally, I would just say mind your business, but here and assuming you are correct a...
In all likelihood, and unless the material you are talking about is very old like from the 1800s, it is still protected under copyright law and not in the public domain.
The question then becomes whether your use of this material amounts to an infringement or is it an excepted fair use (like a parody, for example) or so de minimus (such a small infringement technically) that no action would be brought because it could not be justified?
No one here could tell you of course without...
You are asking very specific questions which suggests that you need your own personal advice not a public forum.
Anytime a US concern hires employees that reside in another country, those employees are protected by the laws of that country not the US. this can be an absolute nightmare in mane places. We had a client that took over a plant in Germany, you have any idea how utterly gnarly German labor law is?
You will required a consult with an employment lawyer in the country where the...
At this point any of us will have more questions than answers. I suggest you use Avvo to locate several lawyers you can discuss this with in more detail.
As noted, if there were any agreements made they would have to be reviewed. The state of copyright law at the time will need to be understood. Further, back in the early 80s a lot of Reggae was produced outside the US. Is the US the correct jurisdiction? Has the work even been registered with the US Copyright Office?
Lastly, in the US...
Unless this was a big money kind of issue for which you stand ready to make an investment, you really have little recourse especially in most Asian countries.
You may want to consult a lawyer in private and discuss your options of course.
Yes, of course they can. Especially if the suit pertains to back payroll or other taxes owed. In general, and as my colleague noted, they are protected if the activity is within the regular course of business such as general business contracts, disputes, etc and the courts will not pierce the corp veil absent a really good reason.
I suggest you discuss your situation in private with a lawyer to flesh out all the details. Most of us here, including myself, offer a free phone consult....