Business Law & Ethics
As a marketing plan for the Marigold Dairy Corporation I will not approve the marketing plan urgently. At first I will initiate a thorough customer research on the impact of the new product to the community and the findings will determine my final decision.
The rights theorists will not agree with this proposal since it’s against the infants’ rights. The infants have the right to be breastfeed because breast milk is very important towards the health of the baby. Denying the infant breast milk and substituting this with powdered milk formula is very unfair because it’s nutritional and protective values cannot match those of the powdered milk formula.
The utilitarian may disagree with the rights theorist because they believe on “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”. From their point of argument the infant deserves to be breastfeed for the sake of their personal wellbeing but on the other side introducing powdered milk formula will save them from being malnourished due to persistent drought that have made their mothers lack adequate breast milk. The profit maximizers will be for the idea to fully introduce the milk formula since they believe that maximum profits are made from maximum sales.
Chapter 5, Need essay sample on "Business Law & Ethics"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page
Need essay sample on "Business Law & Ethics"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page
The EPA’s taking of aerial photographs of the Dow complex was within as well as against the Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The constitution does not allow for unreasonable searches and seizures on personal property which the aerial photographers went against. By allowing EPA into their premises Dow demonstrated that they are a genuine company that preserves the environment and that any further investigations should be more professional rather than the way EPA chose to take after the second denial.
The constitutional law as well allows for the state to interfere with an individual’s Fourth Amendments in some cases. The fact that Dow has enclosed its facilities from any form of ground level public view as well as monitoring all low level flights of aircrafts over its facility implies and also the fact that it denied EPA’s second investigation visit implies that some of its product are harmful to the environment. EPA was thus justified according to the Fourth Amendments to conduct an aerial view of the complex so as to determine the actual the actual activities of the Dow Company. In my own opinion taking of aerial photographs was very justified.
EF was entitled to the preliminary injunction because Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) prohibit trespass to private information of any form. Eplorica’s development of the scraper program and the use of EF travel codes to facilitate gathering of EF’s prices was totally unethical and a breach of Act. Explorica Inc should have developed their own program and set their own prices without any reference to their perceived competitors and this would create a fair market competition among the two companies aiming at the same level of their clients. The law prohibits any access to a computer without the owners authority with intend to obtain financial records of an institution or agency.
Accessing a protected computer with the aim of obtaining any secret information, codes or commands that may cause any form of damage to the agency is illegal. Explorica had violated all of the above and EF had the legal right to apply for an injunction so as to protect its business from unfair competition from its competitor. In my opinion, Explorica should return all the materials generated by the scraper to ensure total privacy of EF’s confidential information.
Chapter 6, Q-4
An assault is a form of crime that can cause bodily harm to the person perceived to have committed an offence. Millbrook’s claim on assault requires both a psychological and punitive approach for the for the damages caused during the arrest. Millbrook requires lots of psychological counseling to assure her that the incident will not recur again and that it was a mistake that she was assaulted false fully. The court ruling should thus ensure that she is well counseled by a professional counselor to help her overcome the fears she already has.
The ruling should as well ensure that she is compensated for financially so as to meet all costs related to the assault.
Battery is crime against one’s body and advocates that anyone should be left alone by others. The court’s ruling on criminal battery committed upon Millbrook should involve a fine for the act, the offenders should as well be imprisoned or both.
False imprisonment is the use of excess physical force than required. False arrest is a form of false imprisonment. The court’s ruling should fine the shopping mall owner for the damages caused to Millbrook because they should have enough evidence before the arrest was made.
R&J had no valid claim over what they referred to as their Personal property. Considering that they failed to provide the list of items they claimed to own, and the new tenant is supposed to continue enjoying the facilities within the premise provided that R&J does not lay their claim on it. Since they had rent areas T&C had the rights to own the property until the time when they pay. R&J did not abide to the lease requirements by failing to inform T&C about their business close as stipulated in the agreement.
The present owner of the place with misplaced property has the rights to the property unless the true owner is found. R&J decision to leave its property behind as they moved out was in itself against the property law because later claims can be referred as trespassing into other people’s property yet they knew they were leaving the premises and left behind their personal belongings only to start claiming later. Lastly, R&J should not have sued T&C because it never honored T&C’s request to submit the list of its property, yet they could have sorted the matter without involving the courts. In my opinion R&J wished to use the court’s ruling so as to evade paying the pending bills.
Alfie, K. (1986). No Contest – The Case Against Competition. Boston New York London: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Barlow B. (2003). Personal Property in a Nutshell. 3d ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West.
Cantor, N. F. (1997). Imagining the Law: Common Law and the Foundations of the American Legal System. New York: HarperCollins.
Jordan, R, L. William D, & Steven D. W. (2000). Secured Transactions in Personal Property. 5th ed. New York: Foundation Press.
Harwood S. (1996) Business as Ethical and Business as Usual, Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Roscoe P, (1999).The Spirit of the Common Law. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.
 Harwood S. (1996) Business as Ethical and Business as Usual, Wadsworth Publishing Co.
 Alfie, K. (1986). No Contest – The Case Against Competition. Boston New York London: Houghton Mifflin Co.
 Roscoe P, (1999).The Spirit of the Common Law. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction..
 Cantor, N. F. (1997). Imagining the Law: Common Law and the Foundations of the American Legal System. New York: HarperCollins.
 Barlow B. ( 2003) . Personal Property in a Nutshell. 3d ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West
 Jordan, R, L. William D, & Steven D. W. (2000). Secured Transactions in Personal Property. 5th ed. New York: Foundation Press.