1D0-61A · Question #42
Melanie works in the sales department at XYZ Company. She decides that her company's marketing team has done a poor job representing the company's brand. Without direction or permission, she starts…
The correct answer is D. Terminating Melanie's employment for copyright and trademark violation, with a cease-. Melanie's unauthorized creation of a social media account using company logos and verbiage constitutes copyright and trademark infringement - she used protected intellectual property without permission, and the account could be mistaken for an official company presence…
Question
Melanie works in the sales department at XYZ Company. She decides that her company’s marketing team has done a poor job representing the company’s brand. Without direction or permission, she starts her own social networking account to help. This account’s name is called XYZProfessional. To customize her page, she uses company logos and verbiage from the company Web site. She then begins communicating with customers and individuals interested in XYZ via this service. Which of the following would be the most appropriate response to Melanie’s actions by the company?
Options
- AProviding a link to Melanie's page from the company's official social networking account
- BSending Melanie a request from the company's Human Resources department to stop
- CAdding references to Melanie's social networking page in the company's internal
- DTerminating Melanie's employment for copyright and trademark violation, with a cease-
How the community answered
(51 responses)- A14% (7)
- B20% (10)
- C6% (3)
- D61% (31)
Explanation
Melanie's unauthorized creation of a social media account using company logos and verbiage constitutes copyright and trademark infringement - she used protected intellectual property without permission, and the account could be mistaken for an official company presence, creating serious legal and reputational liability. D is correct because termination with a cease-and-desist is the legally appropriate response: it stops the IP violation, protects the brand, and signals that unauthorized use of company assets has consequences.
Why the distractors fail:
- A - Linking to her page would legitimize an unauthorized account and amplify the legal exposure, doing the opposite of damage control.
- B - An HR request to stop is too soft; it doesn't address the ongoing legal violation or protect the company from third-party claims arising from Melanie's communications with customers.
- C - Adding internal references to her page would further entrench the unauthorized account into company operations, compounding the problem.
Memory tip: Think "unauthorized + company IP = legal action." Whenever an employee creates something external and official-looking without permission and using protected assets, the company's response must match the severity - HR memos handle policy violations, legal action handles IP violations.
Topics
Community Discussion
3
Ola B.Feb 1, 2026D is the right call here. Melanie used company logos and trademarks without authorization, which exposes XYZ to real legal liability, and operating an unofficial brand account without any oversight is the kind of thing that gets companies into trouble fast, so termination plus a cease-and-desist is the proportional and legally sound response.
Mateus R.Jan 25, 2026D is right, she stole the logo and that is a fireable trademark violation.
Prof. SaraJan 15, 2026D is the only defensible call here, and the exam tests exactly this point: unauthorized use of company logos and trademarked verbiage by a private individual, even a well-meaning employee, exposes the company to intellectual property liability that HR memos cannot retroactively cure. The CIW Social Media Strategist blueprint hammers this under governance and legal compliance, where the threshold for termination plus a cease-and-desist is met the moment proprietary brand assets leave official control without authorization.