Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

ISC2 CSSLP Exam - Topic 1 Question 95 Discussion

Posted by Rosalind on Jan 27, 2025 at 11:44 AM

Adam works as a Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator for a garment company in the United States. A project has been assigned to him to investigate a case of a disloyal employee who is suspected of stealing design of the garments, which belongs to the company and selling those garments of the same design under different brand name. Adam investigated that the company does not have any policy related to the copy of design of the garments. He also investigated that the trademark under which the employee is selling the garments is almost identical to the original trademark of the company. On the grounds of which of the following laws can the employee be prosecuted?

Suggested Answer: A

The Recovery Point Objective (RPO) describes the acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. It is the point in time to which data must

be recovered as defined by the organization. The RPO is generally a definition of what an organization determines is an 'acceptable loss' in a

disaster situation. If the RPO of a company is 2 hours and the time it takes to get the data back into production is 5 hours, the RPO is still 2

hours. Based on this RPO the data must be restored to within 2 hours of the disaster.

Answer B is incorrect. The Recovery Time Objective (RTO) is the duration of time and a service level within which a business process

must be restored after a disaster or disruption in order to avoid unacceptable consequences associated with a break in business continuity. It

includes the time for trying to fix the problem without a recovery, the recovery itself, tests and the communication to the users. Decision time

for user representative is not included. The business continuity timeline usually runs parallel with an incident management timeline and may

start at the same, or different, points.

In accepted business continuity planning methodology, the RTO is established during the Business Impact Analysis (BIA) by the owner of a

process (usually in conjunction with the Business Continuity planner). The RTOs are then presented to senior management for acceptance.

The RTO attaches to the business process and not the resources required to support the process.

Answer D is incorrect. The Recovery Time Actual (RTA) is established during an exercise, actual event, or predetermined based on

recovery methodology the technology support team develops. This is the time frame the technology support takes to deliver the recovered

infrastructure to the business.

Answer C is incorrect. The Recovery Consistency Objective (RCO) is used in Business Continuity Planning in addition to Recovery Point

Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO). It applies data consistency objectives to Continuous Data Protection services.


Get Premium CSSLP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
34 comments · newest first
HE
Heike 10 months ago
Not sure if trademark alone is enough for prosecution.
AB
Abel 11 months ago
Nah, espionage law doesn't fit here.
MO
Moira 11 months ago
Surprised there's no policy on designs! That's risky.
CA
Carlota 11 months ago
I think copyright law could apply too, right?
SH
Sheron 11 months ago
Definitely trademark law! The logos are too similar.
JO
Joaquin 12 months ago
I feel a bit confused; I thought espionage law was more about national security issues. Does it really apply to this case?
DE
Denny 12 months ago
I practiced a question about intellectual property rights, and I think trademark law is the strongest option here.
MA
Malcom 12 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think copyright law might apply here too since it involves the design of garments.
SU
Sue 1 year ago
I remember studying trademark law and how it protects brand identities. The employee's use of a similar trademark seems like a clear violation.
BE
Bettyann 1 year ago
Copyright law could also be relevant here, since the employee is allegedly copying the company's garment designs. I'll need to review the specifics on copyright protection for product designs.
TI
Timmy 1 year ago
Okay, I think I've got this. The key is that the employee is using an almost identical trademark to the company's. That's a clear violation of trademark law, so that's the way I'd approach this.
ET
Ettie 1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The question mentions the employee is suspected of stealing designs, but it's not clear if that's actually a crime. I'll need to think more about the legal implications here.
DO
Dorian 1 year ago
This seems like a straightforward case of trademark infringement. I'd focus on the details around the similar branding and the lack of a company policy on design copying.
JA
Javier 1 year ago
The espionage law seems a bit of a stretch, unless the employee was actually spying on the company in some way. Trademark and copyright are the more obvious angles to pursue.
KA
Kaycee 1 year ago
↳ replying to Javier
A: Copyright law could also be a possibility, since the employee stole the design of the garments.
AL
Alonso 1 year ago
↳ replying to Javier
B: Yeah, I agree. The trademark infringement seems pretty clear.
MA
Malinda 1 year ago
↳ replying to Javier
A: I think the employee can be prosecuted under trademark law.
LO
Loreta 1 year ago
Cyber law could be relevant if the employee used any digital means to steal or distribute the designs, but the trademark issue seems to be the main concern here.
IZ
Izetta 1 year ago
↳ replying to Loreta
A: Cyber law could be relevant if digital means were used, but trademark law is key.
RA
Raul 1 year ago
↳ replying to Loreta
B: Yeah, the trademark issue seems to be the main concern here.
ST
Stephaine 1 year ago
↳ replying to Loreta
A: I think the employee can be prosecuted under trademark law.
MA
Mabel 1 year ago
Haha, maybe the employee should have checked the employee handbook more carefully before trying to start their own 'brand'! Looks like they're in hot water either way.
KE
Keneth 1 year ago
Copyright law could also come into play here, as the employee is essentially copying the company's design. However, the lack of a specific policy on design ownership makes it a bit trickier.
TY
Ty 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
D: Maybe cyber law could also come into play, especially if the employee used any digital means to steal and sell the designs.
GE
Gerry 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
C) Cyber law
LA
Lashaunda 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
B) Trademark law
TI
Tien 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
C: True, but without a specific policy on design ownership, it might be trickier to prosecute under copyright law.
SH
Shasta 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
B: That's a good point. Copyright law could also be relevant since the employee is copying the company's design.
PE
Percy 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
A) Espionage law
DA
Daniel 1 year ago
↳ replying to Keneth
A: I think the employee could be prosecuted under trademark law since the trademark is almost identical to the original one.
AN
Annmarie 1 year ago
This seems like a straightforward case of trademark infringement. The employee is selling products under a nearly identical trademark, which is a clear violation of trademark law.
LA
Lashaun 2 years ago
I believe Copyright law could also be applicable, as the employee is stealing the design of the garments.
GA
Galen 2 years ago
I agree with Broderick, because the employee is using a trademark similar to the company's.
BR
Broderick 2 years ago
I think the employee can be prosecuted under Trademark law.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel