who meet the requirements of Section 327 and are awarded compensation under Section 330 for actual and necessary services rendered and expense reimbursement. The first question is whether an individual who serves as a professional within the meaning of Section 327, but who is disqualified for court appointment for failure to meet the disinterestedness requirement of Section 327(a) and who, therefore, cannot be allowed an administrative claim pursuant to Section 503(b)(2), may nevertheless receive compensation under 503(b)(1) for actual and necessary services rendered to preserve the estate. While some cases authorize payments to professionals who fail to meet the requirements of Section 327, the majority, and the better reasoned eases do not. See In re Weibel, Inc., 176 B.R. at 213 (<HOLDING>); F/S Airlease II, Inc. v. Simon, 844 F.2d 99,
holding that attorney fees must be awarded where plaintiffs section 1983 claim was unreasonable and groundless holding that if compensation is denied under section 503b2 it cannot be awarded under 503b12 holding that compensation is a wage if it is compensation for time worked and is not linked to a contingency such as the financial success of the company holding that plaintiff could recover damages under both the lanham act and the copyright act because the profits awarded under the federal trademark statute constitute compensation rather than a penalty while statutory damages are awarded under the copyright act are designed to serve a variety of purposes other than compensation including deterrence and punishment holding that fees should not be awarded where plaintiff also argued a claim under  523a6