For PrincetonStar

Just need 2 responses, i copied a bunch for you to choose from, need this within 1-1.5hours if possible

 

Chapter 43

 Administrative Law

posted by

ANTHONY HILL

Nov 29, 2013, 8:03 PM

When congress passes an administrative law it also creates an agency to administer and enforce the newly created administrative laws. Until this chapter I did not even know that but all to often it is sad that most of  the administrative laws that are created are a result of some catastrophic event that has occurred that has greatly altered our life as we know it. Sarbanes-Oxley is a great example that comes to mind when the thought of administrative laws come up. One can’t help but to wonder how could we come up with these administrative laws for the greater good without going through the catastrophes such as the housing market crash and the subsequent recession that followed.



Privacy Act

posted by

MARCY METZGER-LEMAITRE

Nov 27, 2013, 11:54 AM

There has been a lot of news of late about American citizens rights to privacy.  In Business Law Cheesman (2013) states that there is an “Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) A federal statute that makes it a crime, without the victim’s consent, to intercept an electronic communication at the point of transmission, while in transit, when stored by a router or server or after receipt by the intended recipient. There are some exceptions to this law” and “Privacy Act A federal statute that stipulates that federal administrative agencies can only maintain information about an individual that is relevant and necessary to accomplish a legitimate agency purpose. The act permits persons to have access to their records and to correct information.”

 

In a New York Times article (2013) from last month it shows that there is growing concern about the collection and trade of personal data, and that state legislatures around the country are trying to propose new privacy laws that will better protect citizens privacy.  Since there has been no U.S. action states are taking the matters into their own hands.  There have been more than two dozen new privacy laws passed in more than 10 states this year alone.  “Many lawmakers say that news reports of widespread surveillance by the National Security Agency have led to more support for the bills among constituents. And in some cases, the state lawmakers say, they have felt compelled to act because of the stalemate in Washington on legislation to strengthen privacy laws” (Sengupta, 2013, para. 2).  

 

California for example, long a pioneer on digital privacy laws, has passed three online privacy bills this year.  Though some bills extend beyond the web for many Internet companies this means keeping a close eye on evolving law to avoid overstepping the different state laws.  For many Internet companies it pays to exercise their lobbying power.  Earlier this year these powers where able to stop a California bill “the right to know bill” from passing that would ”

The bill would have required any business that “retains a customer’s personal information” to share a copy of that information at the customer’s request, as well as disclose which third parties have received the information. The practice of sharing customer data is central to digital advertising and to the large Internet companies that rely on advertising revenue” (Sengupta, 2013, para. 9).  

 

But even in California, the steps taken to garner citizens with more rights are not the sweeping type of overhaul that the White House supports would like to see. According to John Pezold, a Republican representative in Georgia, “They’re [citizens] becoming increasingly wary that their lives are going to be no longer their own,”  who plans to introduce a broad consumer privacy bill in the next legislative session. “We have got to protect that” (Sengupta, 2013, para. 20).

References:

SENGUPTA, S. (2013, October). No U.S. Action, So States Move on Privacy Law. The New York Times, (), . Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/technology/no-us-action-so-states-move-on-privacy-law.html

Less

Chapter 44

 Chino Slaughterhouse

posted by

MARCY METZGER-LEMAITRE

Nov 29, 2013, 10:59 AM

In this chapter it talks about the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) the agency responsible for regulating the meat, poultry, and other food products.  If they find a violation they are allowed to initiate legal proceedings against violations.  That is exactly what happen to one Chino, CA slaughterhouse.  

 

The case was first brought forth with video made by the Human Society and the U.S. government later joined in.  After a more than five year investigation  “The U.S. Justice Department reached a $155 million settlement with the companies that ran a Chino slaughterhouse where sickly “downer” cows were illegally slaughtered for meat used in the National School Lunch Program. The defendants, whose plant closed in 2008, will be able to pay only $3.1 million” (Atley, 2013).  “An attorney for the Humane Society of the United States said it was the first time corner-office packing plant executives had to answer for animal cruelty allegations”  (Atley, 2013).

 

The Human Society will receive $600,000 as a reward for being the whistle-blower in this case.  “This judgment sends a strong message to those who profit from the abuse of farm animals,” Petersan said. “This is the first time the consequences of animal cruelty have been felt by those sitting in the corner office as well.”  Though originally the suit was for $500 million, I found it interesting that they where advised that there was no way the defendants would ever be able to pay this amount of money.  As we have seen in many of the cases that we read about, the monetary damages will never be fully realized, but as the Human Society stated it is the message that is being sent and I think this was a powerful message to the industry and those looking to bribe or buck the system.   

 

Thank You

Marcy Metzger

 

References: 

Atley, R. (2013, November). CHINO: Feds announce $155 million settlement in ‘downer’ cow case. The Press-Enterprise, (), . Retrieved from http://blog.pe.com/government/2013/11/27/chino-feds-announce-155-million-settlement-in-downer-cattle-case/

Less

Re: Chino Slaughterhouse

posted by

ANTHONY HILL

Nov 29, 2013, 8:25 PM

Hello Marcy, this is a great post. It saddens me to think that people would put innocent kids in jeopardy all for the sake of a dollar. It would seem to me that monetary punishment is getting off easy. I am of the impression that there should actually be jail time behind this one. When it comes to putting kids health and possibly lives in jeopardy there is no amount of monetary consequence that can make up for that. I think the Humane Society was great in blowing the whistle on this one but I think it is also incumbent on the government to go after who ever was in charge and press charges and seek some kind of jail time.

Less



False and Deceptive Advertising

posted by

THOMAS FOWLER

Nov 29, 2013, 8:49 AM

Advertising is false and deceptive under Section 5 of the FTC Act if it (1) contains misinformation or omits important information that is likely to mislead a

“reasonable consumer” or (2) makes an unsubstantiated claim (e.g., “This product is 33 percent better than our competitor’s”). Proof of actual deception is not

required. Statements of opinion and “sales talk”  do no tconstitute false and deceptive advertising. Bait and switch is a type of deceptive advertising under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The FTC states that a bait and switch occurs if the seller refuses to show consumers the advertised merchandise, discourages employees from selling the advertised merchandise, or fails to have adequate quantities of the advertised merchandise available (cheeseman 2013).

 
 
 
 

Cheeseman, H.R. (2013). Business law: Legal environment, online commerce, business ethics, and international issues (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

 

Less

Re: False and Deceptive Advertising

posted by

ANTHONY HILL

Nov 29, 2013, 8:40 PM

Hello Thomas, I totally agree with your post on false advertising but it almost sounds like you are saying that all advertising is false and deceptive but not all advertising is false and deceptive. I have found some advertising to actually do what they say it will do. For example, spray on water sealant. I was watching tv and I saw a guys advertising spray on water sealant and I bought a couple of cans and it works perfectly and it did just what the advertisement said it was going to do. In today’s society if it don’t work people will take that product back to the stores and get a refund which is not good for the company.

Less



Do not Call list

posted by

TERISA BARANOSKI

Nov 29, 2013, 8:35 AM

I work nights anytime from 7:00pm to 9:00am depending on our manufacturing schedule and management meetings so sleeping during the day is important. The one thing I don’t want to do is get up to answer unwanted phone calls from someone trying to enrich my life by selling me something I probably don’t want or need. The national Do Not Call Registry helps protect my right not to be disturbed by these mindless robo calling machines. In Chapter 44, you’ll find that the FTC, pursuant to it’s authority under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act along with the Federal Trade Commission established the national Do-Not-Call list. The registry applies to all telemarketers with the exception to some non-profit groups, the registry covers both interstate and intrastate calls.

Less

Re: Do not Call list

posted by

JAMEELAH NEWTON-JONES

Nov 29, 2013, 1:32 PM

The National Do Not Call Registry gives you a choice about whether to receive telemarketing calls at home. Most telemarketers should not call your number once it has been on the registry for 31 days. If they do, you can file a complaint at this Website. You can register your home or mobile phone for free.

Less