Answer:
<em>to inform the school board about the problem</em>
<em>to persuade the school board to research solution</em>
<em>to persuade the school board to take action</em>
<em />
Explanation: <em>in order of actions to be taken, Ryan should firstly inform the school about the problem, then persuade them to research a solution before finally taking action on the problem.</em>
<u><em>Please mark brainliest...</em></u>
Answer:Im honestly not sure you would have to ask someone else it looks a lil confusing
Explanation:
Textual evidence is used to add credibility to a claim or argument. It shows people how you came to an answer.
Answer:
C.Your company has probably violated the automaker's trademark.
Explanation:
The question is incomplete. Here is the complete question:
You work for a pharmaceuticals company. During your lunch breaks, you have become acquainted with one of the graphic artists at your company. He has just finished designing a logo for a new product. That logo is now on your company's Web site. He mentions to you one day that he started designing the logo by downloading from the Internet a logo that he found on an automaker's Web site. Then he changed the logo a little. Which of the following statements is true?A.Your company is protected by the fairuse concept because your company and the other company are in different industries.
B.Your company is protected by the work-made-for-hire concept.
C.Your company has probably violated the automaker's trademark.
D.Your company is protected because there is no trademark or registered trademark symbol after the logo on the automaker's Website.
Explanation Begins:
The answer is "your company has probably violated the automaker's
trademark" because when a Trademark is been violated it means that an individual or company seems to be using the same concept which seems like an exact copy but tries to put it in their name as the original owner by change some parts making it look like their own work.
The graphic designer downloaded the logo from an automaker website which means the original owner of the logo was from the "automaker website" then decides to use that same logo for the "pharmaceutical company" then decides to change a little thing in the logo which means he violated their trademark because he copied the same logo from the automaker website but trying to change it to seem like the pharmaceutical company means that he is violating the trademark of the automaker website.
