Bootleggers use this for the own profit. It is incredibly important to give credit to the originator for their work. If someone was to be caught committing these acts will cause the losing the trust of others, academic standing, credibility, and/or sometimes their freedom. Quiz: You Be the Judge The Verdict is In! Quiz results for: Kimberly Whitehead Question 1: Which of the following is a requirement for including verbatim (word for word) information from an outside source?
(b) What are the ethical issues involved in this situation? The ethical issues involved in this situation pertain to following accepted accounting principles. Violating the generally accepted accounting principles to satisfy a short-term personal or company would create misleading financial statements. This situation would therefore be unethical. Robbin Industries is jeopardizing itself by not properly reporting the advertising costs.
According to the Commerce Clause the state statute is unconstitutional because it is a burden on interstate commerce to the state of Confusion. This law prohibits B-type hitch fittings. Only one manufacturer in the state of Confusion makes this type of hitch. This creates problems such as expense, complications of trade, time consumption, and business transactions. Because of all these problems along with unconstitutional barriers through this statute, there is a significant chance that Tanya will win this case.
Not to mention WIRETIME is unethical in their actions. Computer hacking is considered criminalizing under The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Under this, BUGusa would have the right to obtain compensatory damages and court ordered relief or other just relief. Steven and WIRETIME may be sued for the executed plot performed because it is unlawful to purposely access computer information without authority to do so, under section 1030 (a)(2) – Unlawful Access to Obtain Information. If he is caught in the act, he can be charged under Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
In the end, I had an employee who had violated the NDA, Aaron Web, and another employee who had broken the law for tdhe company, Jamal Moore. * The first step taken in the case was to figure out what the problem really was and what issue applied to the problem. My decision on this was, “Whether you should use the information obtained by Jamal Moore to discipline Aaron Webb for violating the NDA.” Personally, I was worried that if I knowingly used the illegally-gathered information from Jamal against Aaron, would be unethical and pose a possible legitimate for Aaron against the company. * The second step was to identify the stakeholders. It
For a monopoly to be considered to breach antitrust laws found within the Sherman Act a set of criteria need to be met. First, the individual must be in control of a monopoly and not a perceived monopoly.The next stepping stone to breaking the antitrust laws found within Section 2 of the Sherman Act directly concerns intent. ( Antitrust,488) If it is Ashwin Selvarajan the intent of an individual to gain monopolistic control and then unleash the forces of their monopolistic control on the market, erasing many levels of competition within their business sector, then this would be considered a breach of the Sherman Act. Saul can argue Murray, by trying to break the past business practice and also by acquiring other competition is showing intent to gain monopolistic attitude. There are a few theories which support Murray Firstly, A monopoly can develop from the sale of a superior product with respect to the company’s competitors.
Assess the view that crime and deviance are the products of labelling processes. Crime is an illegal act that is punishable by law such as stealing and deviance is an act which goes against society’s norms and values such as talking loudly in a library. Interactionists like Becker argue that Crime and Deviance is socially constructed and is therefore a product id labelling. However not al sociologists hold the same view. Becker argued that it is not a certain behaviour or act that is deviant but it is how we react to it that makes it deviant.
Law Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council shows that unsigned exclusion clauses need to be clearly defined to a reasonable person. Another case highlighting the need for exclusions to be clearly informed to the other party is the case of Causer v Browne. As for the case of White v John Warwick & Co Ltd the court held that the company providing defective product is liable for their negligence. If reasonably sufficient notice is given as to the existence of an exemption clause, then it is accepted by the courts that that clause becomes parts of the contract. The case that set this dictum, and which laid our the guidelines for testing the reasonableness and sufficiency of the notice
"China has been known to violate the intellectual property rights related to technology, goods, and services, harming the companies from which it steals. Make a recommendation on how a U.S. company that has fallen victim to this Chinese practice should respond so as to protect its intellectual property." The US companies must set up their own manufacturing and trade rules and laws and enforce them in order to have more access and freedom