Research Topics: Legal And Ethical Studies Coursework

Sample Internal Memorandum of MOONDANCE MUSIC: Legal Guidelines for Door-to-Door Solicitation in California

MOONDANCE MUSIC MEMORANDUM   Data:              31 March 2006 To:                  General Manager of Moondance Music From:             Bonnie Estes, Sales Officer Subject:        Legal Guidelines for Door-to-Door Solicitation in California     Purpose   The purpose of this memo is to provide information on the legal provisions of door-to-door solicitation in California to provide guidelines to the sales force on how to apply door-to-door solicitation without violating any laws that would subject the company to complaints and unnecessary lawsuits.     Summary   Sections 17500.3/17510-17510.95 of the Business and Professions Code defines door-to-door solicitations, and clarifies the disclosure requirements for solicitation. Door-to-door solicitations or sales refer to the activity of offering something with the expectation of receiving monetary compensation from people accepting the offer. To ensure customers of the good intentions of the door-to-door salesman these should be followed: 1) presentation of a solicitation card or brochure and identification, 2) containing the personal and contact details of the person doing the solicitation, 3) and the business and contact details of the business organization the salesman is representing, 4) which should be duly signed by an authorized officer of the organization, and 5) written in at least a 10 point font to readable.   Title 16, Part 1, Section 429.1 of the Code of Federal Regulations considers as unfair and deceptive: 1) failure to provide the customer with a complete copy of the sales contract at the time of transaction using a language similar to what was used during the oral sales presentation, containing the details of the transaction, signed by the buyer and printed in at least a 10-point font; and 2) failure to provide the buyer a copy of the buyer’s right to cancel the contract.   Section 1689.5 of the California Civil Code provides the buyer’s right to rescind or cancel the contract within three business days after the transaction. Based on these legislations, salespeople should have an identification or solicitation card, a receipt or sales contract and document stating the buyer’s three-day cancellation right.     Discussion   Households are aware of the reported cases of fraudulent or deceptive door-to-door salespeople. As a public interest response, several laws have been put in place to protect customers from fraud and to encourage legitimate business organizations to follow the legal provisions and distinguish themselves from fraudulent and deceptive businesses or individuals.   Sections 17500.3/17510-17510.95 defines door-to-door solicitation as any activity comprising of an offer of a good or service from door-to-door or household-to-household in exchange for a price or compensation. Solicitation is similar to sales for profit to distinguish the activity from door-to-door sales for charitable purposes. Door-to-door solicitation may also refer to recruitment and other transactions provided it include a sales contract.   The same provisions also provide the requirements for door-to-door solicitation. Section 17500.3 provides that upon initial contact with customers, the salesperson should identify himself/herself verbally, show an identification card, and identify the purpose of the solicitation, the product or service being offered and the company manufacturing or providing the goods or services. Failure to do this may be a ground for the consumer’s claim for damages that may amount to as much as twice the sales price except only if the customer willingly signed a document that the salesperson complied with this requirement. This is a very important guideline for salespeople and if possible, an attestation clause may be included in the sales receipt or contract to protect the salespeople from unscrupulous customers. Section 17510-17510.95 provides for the requirement of presenting a solicitation card containing the information previously discussed and including other information that may be of interest to the customer to satisfy any questions of trustworthiness.   Title 16, Part 1, Section 429.1 of the Code of Federal Regulations provides the requirements of a sales contract in door-to-door sales and actions that constitute fraud or deception. The contract should be in the same language as the sales presentation; it should contain the description of the item bought, the price and quantity; the buyer should sign it; and the print should be a readable font or at least a 10-point font. This is important to both buyer and seller as a written proof of the sales transaction and as basis of the day when the three-day right to cancel commences. The contract or a separate document should also be given to the buyer that shows his/her legal right to cancel the contract within three days from the transaction to comply with consumer rights.   Section 1689.5 of the California Civil Code covers the rights of consumers to rescind, cancel or terminate the contract within three days after the transaction. However, salespeople should be aware that the three-day cancellation only applies to a transaction involving or more, the amount including interest, shipping and other charges provided the transaction occurs outside of the normal business place such as through door-to-door sales. The three-day cancellation right is also limited to goods and services procured for personal, household or family use. This period does not also include Sundays and holidays.     Conclusion/Recommendations   Compliance with the legal requirements of door-to-door sales is not only part of the obligation of Moondance Music but also essential to its marketing strategy because the effective implementation of the strategy involves the consideration of the rights of consumers. Customers are open to sales presentation when they are convinced of the trustworthiness of the salesperson and the credibility of the company employing the salesperson.   Moondance Music door-to-door salespeople should have sufficient knowledge of both legal requirements and marketing strategies in door-to-door sales. In compliance with legal requirements, salespeople should always have with them an identification or solicitation card, a receipt form, a sales contract form and a document stating the three-day cancellation rights of customers. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Sample Internal Memorandum of MOONDANCE MUSIC: Legal Guidelines for Door-to-Door Solicitation in California

MOONDANCE MUSIC MEMORANDUM Data: 31 March 2006 To: General Manager of Moondance Music From: ...

Legal and ethical studies coursework

Coursework 1: legal and ethical studies   Questions You boss is extremely impressed by your brilliant performance so far – as described by yourself – on the Master’s degree in Information Technology Security.   She has now been invited to nominate a delegate to the Ethics committee of the (fictional) professional society “The International Society of Information Technology Professionals”. This society is one of the biggest and most important of the professional societies and institutes and takes its position very seriously.   Knowing of your skill, professional rectitude, personal honesty, intelligence and interest in the theory and background of security, she has nominated you as easily the most appropriate person in the company. Congratulations.   Our first task is attached. You are to formally report on these four complaints.   Advice While obviously Information knowledge, style and accuracy are all important; we are also looking for evidence of the critical analysis of such information. Students will be assessed on level of knowledge and understanding, quality of argument, style and expression and use of sources and referencing. It is certainly true that we are looking for a student’s personal opinion, however it would be reassuring to see indications that this opinion is shaped by the research carried out, by facts and by constructive thought.   Ethical scenarios Background   You are appointed to one the Ethics subcommittees of the professional society “The International Society of Information Technology Professionals”, investigating complaints against members.   In practice, most complaints tend to be brought by large organisations. This is because complaints cannot be brought against large organisations; such disputes tend to end up in the courts. While an individual can also be sued in the courts, the costs involved and the probability that individuals are most unlikely in any case to be able to afford to pay significant compensation means that condemnation by one’s peers has proved to be most effective sanction.   This afternoon you have been asked to consider five normal complaints and to make eventual recommendations to the disciplinary committee of the Society. You are only to make a recommendation about the person who is the subject of the complaint.   The subcommittee are allowed to make one of the following recommendations.   ·        Complaints not upheld – effectively an acquittal ·        Complaint upheld – no further action required  (an exceptional recommendation) ·        Complaint upheld – a fine imposed of up to 6 months salary and the complaint to be recorded for up to ten years on the professional register (the person might have difficulty in getting a new job). The size of fine and length of record – either might be zero – are to be part of the recommendation. ·        Complaint upheld – removal of name from professional register (the person will never work in the industry again)   The punishment in recommendations 3 or 4 may be suspended for up to two years. This means that the punishment will be automatically imposed if and only if the person has a further complaint upheld within the time stated.   Each of the members of the subcommittee is requested to write a set of formal initial briefs (one brief for each complaint) to be sent to the subcommittee chair. Each brief is to contain sufficient details of the complaint and the arguments of both sides to be able to be understood when read alone; it should also include your recommendations with reasons. You may choose your own style of report or adapt that in the aide-memoire. Each brief is expected to be about 400 – 750 words; where appropriate, descriptions of the complaints may be repeated in distinct briefs.   Summary of complaints   Complaint 1: Depak Singh (no previous complaints) <ul style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0in" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal"> Unethical conduct – carrying out work for which he was not qualified </li> </ul> Complaint 2: William Brown (no previous complaints) <ul style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0in" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal"> Unethical conduct – carrying out work for which he was not qualified </li> </ul>   Complaint 3: Professor Sir Jeremy Baightor (four previous complaints – none upheld) <ul style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0in" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal"> Unethical conduct – failure to disclose conflicts of interest </li> </ul>   Complaint 4: Dr Keith Northlanding (one previous complaint – none upheld)             <ul style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0in" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal"> Unethical conduct – unprofessional, high-handed and unacceptable behaviour   </li> </ul>   Complaint 1 and 2   Bill Brown and Depak Singh are both originally from New Zealand and went to school and university together. On graduation with good degrees in Computer Science, the decided to spend two years contracting in the United Kingdom. Both got contracting posts as consultants with “e><centric”, one of the top international consultancies which was recently spun off by its accounting parent company Ethan Extension.   Both Bill and Depak specialise in constructing and installing database. The nature of consultancy work means that both the friends are regularly outsourced to third party companies. Both are happy to be contractors; while they do not have notional security of full-time employees, they are better paid. In any case, they intend to return to New Zealand, eventually.   Then Depak meets a girl of whom even his parents approve, falls in love and gets married. Within a year, he has a little daughter. Deciding to settle in the UK, he accepts the offer of a full-time permanent post with e><centric.   Soon after this, e><centric is asked to set up the security for a web site for one of its smaller customers, illogica. Unfortunately, none of e><centric’s web security specialists are available; nevertheless e><centric accepts the work and Bill and Depak’s manager instructs them to go on-site to set up the website/   When Bill and Depak point out that neither has any direct experience of setting up secure websites, their manager tells manager tells them not to worry and that he is confident that they will be fine. In any case they will be able to contact the experts at e><centric if there is any problem.   Both Bill and Depak would like to do the work; it looks interesting and they would welcome the opportunity to broaden their experience. Nevertheless, Bill asks the manager if Illogica realise that they will be getting relatively inexperienced staff. The manager says no and that the client is not to be told this, that Bill and Depak will be fine, that they are to do their best but are not to tell Illogica under and circumstances.   Even so, Bill is still unhappy – he is fairly sure that Illogica are being charged for experts in web security – and wants to tell Illogica anyway. Depak points out that bachelor Bill may be OK – he can go back to NZ whenever he wants  – but that he (Depak) has a wife, daughter, mortgage and dog can cant afford to be sacked. Bill and Depak therefore agree to do what the boss wants, and set the work.   However, one of the Illogica’s employees recognises Bill and realises that he has no experience in this field. Illogica have now filed complaints against both Bill and Depak. To your inquiry both repeat their great regret at what happened. Both accept their responsibilities; neither tries to blame the other.           Complaint 3   Professor Sir Jeremy Baightor is one of the foremost computer forensic experts in the world, and his services are in much demand, especially by prosecutors. Like many bright men, Baightor is arrogant and rude to those he considers his intellectual inferiors – which he would say is approximately some 99.96% of the population. Some of the deductions have been controversial; four convictions based on his evidence have been reversed after several years dispute with great publicity although Baightor personally has been exonerated in each case. It is also certainly true that Baightor has annoyed some powerful vested interests.   In particular, Baightor has created a statistical cryptanalytic tool called “Randomised Keyword Analysis” or RKA. While RKA does appear to give correct plaintext some of the time – Baightor claims about 40% to 45% while his detractors say no more than 21% – its success rate seems to depend critically on the original choice of key in the original encryption. It seems to be more successful when Baightor chooses the key for validation purposes rather than when he has no control over the key choice. Moreover, running the tools always gives a solution text, but there is no way to tell if this resulting text is correct (without knowing the key, which rather begs the question!). Baightor claims to have developed some rules of thumb for testing the accuracy of the decryption, but says that these “are too intuitive and too intellectually complex to be able to put into simple words, especially when most people are not capable of understanding then”! RKA does not provide a solution for the key, only for the text.   One of the Baightor’s most famous cases involved some internal comments contained in source code used in software developed by top software house “Greasy software”. It was claimed that Greasy programs in engine control computers has caused cars and “bendy-buses” to burst into flames without warning, and that several fatalities had followed. Greasy had always denied that their software had or could have been responsible; instead they asserted that it worked, that it had been developed using “best practice” and that they had no idea that any other interpretation was possible.   In a major class-action court case brought by dependants of those killed in car fires, the content of several encrypted internal Greasy source code comments became central. Greasy policy was to include a great deal of information encrypted in comments within its source code, which when compiled and linked could not be recovered. According to the decryption of these comments provided by RKA, senior management at Greasy had been aware of a software logic design flaw from a very early stage. However they had decided that the cost of publicly correcting the error, which would include the almost certain loss of a multi-billion defence contract to a European consortium, was greater than any nominal compensation that might be awarded in the future, are therefore the company to do nothing. Greasy denied that this translation was correct and provided an alternative innocuous plaintext. However they were unable to prove that their version was correct because all keys used at that time had subsequently been destroyed by USA Federal government order during a security scare. It was also shown that if the relevant key were publicised, then the philosophy behind the source code of many other Greasy programs would become public property, with consequences for intellectual property rights, operating system security and so on. Despite establishing many serious academic points about the validity of RKA, Greasy lost the court case and were ordered to pay punitive compensation running into billions of dollars by a state jury in California. They also lost the subsequent appeal in the California State Appeals Court, although the compensation was reduced to several hundreds of millions of dollars. Greasy are still trying to lodge further appeal, claiming that the jury were emotionally influenced by the horrific injuries of the victims and by anti-big-business feelings rather than by the evidence. Similar cases are pending in several other jurisdictions.   Now it has been revealed that while carrying out (government funded) research refining and validating RKA, Baightor was also acting as a paid adviser for the plaintiff’s solicitors in the court cases and used much of the same material in both investigations. While he did mention this double funding in both submissions, it was buried in the very small print at the end of the documentation. Obviously Baightor is not Greasy’s favourite person, and the company has made a formal complaint about his behaviour, implying that there is a possibility that Baightor allowed the private payments to influence his research findings. It has been suggested that Baightor would have a vested interest in producing evidence against Greasy as this would enhance his reputation and that of RKA and also that the payments by the solicitors would have been much smaller if he had found no evidence and the case has been dropped.   To your inquiry, Baightor has said that your committee is not capable of understanding the problem and that the accusation is stupid and malicious, and not worth of a reply, so he wont give one.   Complaint 4   Dr Keith Northlanding is one of the outstanding and most unusual computer scientest currently working in field. Getting his first Dphil in psychology, supervised by Esyenck at Oxford, back in the mid-sixties, Keith moved into computer research in the new department of artificial intelegence at Edindrough working with Donald Mitchie. Here he develops some brilliant paradigms; cynics said his success stemmed from the fact that he treated the computer just like a psychological if not a psychotic patient. Quick and alert. Keith has one major fault; he makes up his mind almost instantaneously, and once he has made up his mind about an issue, it is almost impossible to persuade him even to admit the possibility of an alternative viewpoint, let alone to accept the alternative.   Although eight years ago, Richard Phillips, then a spotty bespectacled youth of 22, was sentenced to thirty five years imprisonment for a string of computer related offences, including information gained by his hacking  to perform young women to perform a string of degrading sexual acts with him. The case was very controversial from the start; the lord chief justice threw out half the charges in pre-trial discussions before the jury was empanelled on the ground that black mailing a women to agree to sex did not constitute rape in law as she has consented. Richard vehemently denied all the charges, but was convicted almost solely on the expert evidence gleaned from his computer by professor Sir Jeremy Baightor, one of the foremost computer forensic experts in the world. Northlanding was not involved in any way in the case.   The case continued to be in the public view the first appeal was dismissed with the three judges on the Court of Appeals describing Richard as ‘manifestly guilty’ Among other journalistic investigations, a panorama programme on the BBC examined the case; during the programme Richard father Elvet and twin sister Kathryn described on screen how their computer had regularly seemed to have a mind of its own, running scripts and other anonymous programs which seemed never to have been installed or called. Northlanding watched the programme; it was the first he had heard of the case; he had never seen any of the documents, have never even met Richard, Kathryn or Elvent; nevertheless he became convicted almost immediately that Elvet was  guilty of all the crimes. The moment the programme ended, Northlanding rang the local serious crime squad, who consequently arrested Elvetin a dawn raid – when unaccountably – the press and TV just happened to be passing by. The police seized his computer, took his apartment to pieces, questioned his friends, neighbours and work colleagues and held him for interrogation for 72 hrs before releasing him for lack of corroborating evidence.   Subsequently, a man from the other end of the country was convicted on overwhelming evidence of the same charges as Richard, together with further changes including placing malicious Trojans on the Phillips computer. This together with some other newly discovered evidence, proved that neither Richard nor Elvent could have been guilty; a different troika of judges on the Court of appeal quashed all Richard’s convictions, describing him as ‘manifestly innocent’   Elvet has now complained about Northlanding’s behaviour, describing it as ‘unprofessional, high-handed and unacceptable’.   The Chief Superintendent from the serious crime squad told your enquiry that when a famous expert – who happens to a advisor to and a personal friend of both Home Secretary and the Chief Constable – reports a crime and names a suspect, then you don’t ignore it. Elvet has been checked through all the databases both here and through Interpol; apart from one arrest(no charge) while taking part in anti-Vietnam demonstration while a student in Coventry in 1971 – he called a constable who asked him to move on a ‘lackey of capitalist facist state, and that come the revolution he (the policeman) would be the first to be strangled with the guts of the chief constable’ – he has no record for any sort in any country. He works in human resources for a car manufacturer in Midlands; has done so for the fifteen women. His son was seen as a bit of a computer nerd, but harmless; everybody was surprised by the conviction. One comment by the women across the road; ‘virus writing. Yes; fantasizing about connie from AOL advert, yes; rape, never!’The chief superintendent also said it might be regrettable, but any bobby can get £100 cash by tipping off the SUN and MIRROR newspaper about the raid.   To your enquiry, Northlanding has defended himself vigorously: ‘Elevt may not have don this particular one, but he clearly is guilty of something. He took on an undergraduate degree in Psychology at Warwick university;   did you know that? Many psychology students know that there is something wrong with them mentally and choose to study the subject because they want to find out what it is. I’ve seen them, its why they make such a good subjects for surveys. Some only are autistic – it might be as mild as Asperger’s or Tourette’s. Others turn out to be paranoid schizophrenics or psychotic manic-depressives. He knows that he has problems.   ‘Look at these piggy eyes, that tendency to acne, that self satisfied smirk. Look at his body –language; guilty in every mincing step; guilty every time he puts his hands up his mouth. H smokes; that’s a nipple substitute. No-one normal chooses round glasses like those; they are a signal to fellow paedophiles and rapists that the wearer is one of them. I know we no longer symptoms of self-abuse – you look at what ‘Scouting for boys’ (by Badan-Powell who was a wonderful empirical psychologist and judge of character) says about ‘beastliness’ and about smoking.   ‘Any good psychologist can tell at once that he wants to be rapist; but has hasn’t the guts to accost grown women. I bet he watched dominant pornography as a child. Some of his sort turn to attacking children, but he’s just the type to blackmail poor inadequate kids into giving into him. The police had to investigate him. I had to tell them. It would have been unethical to do otherwise.         Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Legal and ethical studies coursework

Coursework 1: legal and ethical studies Questions You boss is extremely impressed by your brilliant performance so far – as described...

Case Studies in relation to Workplace Privacy Issues in using Technology: Discrimination Part 1

Discrimination Part 1 Introduction             Respect and fairness are critical in the treatment of employers with their employees. One reason for this is that this establishes the company’s reputation for justice and objectivity. This reputation is being carefully analyzed by many individuals both inside and outside the organization and is said to be a crucial factor in retaining and attracting desirable employees. Another and an equally important reason is that recognizing and protecting employee workplace rights lessens the possibility of the company in becoming involved and charged with discrimination, leading to lengthy proceedings and costly resolutions (“Rights in the Workplace”, 2006). In this paper, the U.S. Federal Law will be discussed, and its importance will be emphasized by citing two concrete examples. This is in relation to workplace privacy issues in using technology. The U.S. Federal Law             There are several federal laws in the prohibition of job discrimination. These include the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older; Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments; Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government; and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination. These laws are being enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which provides supervision and coordination of all federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices, and policies (“Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination Questions and Answers”, 2002). These laws serve as guide on the actions of employers in protection and implementation of rules and regulations in their companies. To further understand the significance of these laws, it is better to apply them to real-life examples or cases.             One specific case is the Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Sheila White case, where White claimed that she was retaliated against for complaining about sexual harassment after complaining to company officials that her supervisor insulted and reassigned her, for being inappropriate in working in the department. White had been operating a forklift, but was reassigned to perform standard track laborer tasks, as a “more senior man” should be assigned to the position. She filed a charge with the EEOC, but was suspended several days later without pay, for insubordination. With this, the Supreme Court found this case constituted retaliation, as White had been reassigned to a job that was less prestigious, less desirable and more difficult, and although she gotten her back pay, she would not know whether she would get her job back (“Change in Job Duties Might be Retaliation, says Supreme Court”, 2006). This is a clear case stating the discrimination based on sex or gender, as Ms. White was assigned a more difficult job in favor of a “more senior man”. This case has violated the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and proper legal actions must be taken by the Courts to protect the rights of every employee.             Another case is the case of Epson America, Inc. v Alana Shoars, where Shoars was fired for reporting his supervisor of tapping company emails and threatening her if, she interfered. Her alleged termination occurred in retaliation of her reporting of and refusal to go along with her supervisor’s and the company intercepting the email, which violated the public policy and prohibitions concerning wiretapping and eavesdropping, as stated in the Penal Code sections 630-632.5. The Courts found that Epson and Shoars’ supervisor violated the Penal Code section 631 (“Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace”, 1993).  In relation to the federal laws stated, the case violates these laws as it is prohibited to immediately fire an employee without legal trial or evidence, under Title VII, ADA and ADEA, this is also a form of discrimination. Moreover, this case is also related to workplace privacy issues in a company.             Employees cannot expect privacy in their conversations, especially concerning the use of computers, emails and other Internet related conversations, for most computer monitoring equipment permits employers to monitor their files and conversations without the knowledge of their employees. This gives us the information that in most cases, electronic mails or emails and voice mails are not private. If an email system is being used in a company, the employer owns it and is allowed to review its contents. Likewise, messages sent within the company, as well as those that are sent from the employee’s terminal to another company or from another company to the employee can be subject to monitoring by an employer. This includes web-based email accounts such as Yahoo Mail and Hotmail, as well as instant messages. Even if the messages are deleted from the terminal, chances are, they are still in the computer system because electronic mail systems retain messages in memory and are often backed up on magnetic tape, along with other important data from the computer system. Similarly, even if the email system has an option for marking messages as private, in most cases, privacy cannot be guaranteed. This can only be done through the process of encryption, where it involves the scrambling messages at the sender’s terminal, then unscrambling the message at the receiver’s terminal (“Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace”, 1993). This is said to be a guarantee for the company to sort the exchange of information to provide safety, integrity and reputation of the company. Conclusion             Uplifting the workplace rights of employees is essential as it provides protection and security for each individual working in a company and earning a living. Each company must respect the rights of their employees, as they are the moving force of the company. This is why violation of these rights must be punishable by law and must be given appropriate action, to alleviate the negative effects it brings to the labor force. The laws mentioned recognize the rights of each employee, and the employer has the responsibility to protect them.  Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Case Studies in relation to Workplace Privacy Issues in using Technology: Discrimination Part 1

Discrimination Part 1 Introduction Respect and fairness are critical in the treatment of employers with their employees. One...

LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES

I.      Introduction   The following report is a result of the observation and analysis of the particular divisions of the company, Security Corp (SC). For the intention of D’Ausecours to acquire the said company, the findings of this report are deemed necessary in order to establish a strong base of information for the acquisition of SC. Moreover, the findings of this report will also be employed to be an account of the due diligence of the target company. Based on the investigative methods employed for the gathering of the necessary data, D’Ausecours will be notified of the necessary risks involved in the acquisition of SC both in the short-term and long-term basis. This report will establish the existing condition that D’Ausecours needs to be acquainted to in order to help them deal with SC once the take over indeed push through. In establishing the importance of this document, it is the contention of the paper to attempt to create an in-depth analysis of the existing circumstances within the target company. Moreover, so as to clearly establish the specific areas of the target company that needs attention, the discussions in this paper is going to be divided into several parts. This is to establish a clear and concise depiction and analysis of certain aspects of SC. At the end of the said discussions, a conclusion and a set of recommendations will be given.     II.   Confidential information   The observation of the target company, SC, established that the employees of the company have no confidentiality clause signed. This provides SC at great risk with regards to the leaking of information external of the company. This information could be used against the company by other players in the industry where SC partakes in. The worse part is that every employee of the said company is able to carry this out without any restriction or any form of sanction once they are caught. To boot, there are several hundreds of employees that could be suspected once vital information indeed leaked outside the company. And this is situation where the said company incurs a great liability.  This is similarly a liability for the D’Ausecours considering that there is no actual record of the number of individuals or the specific people who are able to access the information vital to SC. This means that at the worse case scenario, all employees are able to leak information, and D’Ausecours once they have acquired the company, could do nothing about it.   In this context, the keeping of the trade secrets of SC, is compromised. According to the case of  [1918] 35 TLR 87, a trade secret could be classified as a “technical, scientific, secret formula or design.” This means that the stated future projects could be leaked out from the said company. The intricacies of the said future plans of the prospective projects listed in the portfolio of SC may be at risk of being given to people outside of the firm. Moreover, the case of [1991] IRLR 80 similarly stated that trade secrets are information that are considered as a highly confidential which could also take the form of a “non-technical” nature. According to the said case, such information, if leaked to the other players in the industry, may trigger an actual and considerable damage to the firm, in this case SC. Thus, given the findings of the said investigation on SC, the employer is at risk of being harmed, probably in terms of reputation or any other factor that could damage the firm as a whole, the moment even a single employee gets hold of any information. This is feasible considering that the said employees are not bound by any clause prohibiting them to leak the said information.   A major concern of the investigation is the fact that the marketing information of the company might have been compromised. ( [1978] 1 All ER 1026) In this scenario, the competitive edge of SC might be compromised by the risk of such exposure. The list of the possible clients and existing customers including the individual agreements that they have gone into are among the basic information that could be considered confidential and at the same time damaging for the company. The moment this information is transferred to the hands of other competitors, then the said competitors acquires an unfair leverage against SC. To address this situation, a recommendation is provided in the last part of the report.   III.Copyright and intellectual property   As presented in the case of SC, the investigation found out that the products that the target company generally are made of works of employees, contractors and other companies. The troubling matter in this context is that formal contracts are completed follow on a much delayed time in the employment of players external of the company. This means that information is openly shared among the employees, contractors, and other companies within a completion of a project. In this process, the intellectual property of the firm, SC, is not protected. (1992) Although the companies are employed initially at a contractual level, SC is still not safe from them from getting hold of information that could be deemed important for the company. Information like business processes, connections and other information that could be accessed by the contractors and other companies may place SC at risk.   Another issue in this context is that the final product that are these SC employees, contractors and other companies complete are basically in an open source format. This means that after the product is completed, the work is accessible to everyone who uses the same application as that of SC. (, 2002) This implies that after a project is done, then the project becomes public and free. This presents a new problem in the context of the intellectual property in the case of D’Ausecours if it wants to purchase SC. In this situation, there is a considerable amount of risk for the company with regards to the loss of Intellectual property, provided that SC continues to use an open source in their codes. Another risk is that the previous projects of the SC with contractors and other companies are still open to scepticism. Specifically, SC could not be sure if the codes provided by the contractors and other companies are intellectual property of another entity. Thus, there is still the risk of potential lawsuits on the part of SC when they chose an open source as their mode of application. (, 2002)   In this section, it has been established that the company is at risk of breach with regards to their security, particularly with the security of their intellectual property. This is revealed in the absence of a contract prior to the employment of the contractors and other companies in a completion of a project. Another risk is that the company is open to any lawsuit as a result of the rather vague sources of the codes used by the previous contractors and other companies. The company is in a situation wherein it is unaware of the possible breach of any intellectual property rights by other entities using the same open source as they are employing. Recommendations for these observations will be provided in the concluding part of this paper. IV.           Records, staff surveillance and monitoring There are certain issues that the company may possibly encounter with regards to their monitoring of employees with regards to electronic usage, like computer use and other ICT-related applications. Let us first look at the records of the company. There is the problem of having a considerable number of information from the staff. On the subject of surveillance and monitoring, the IT Department of the company examines them at will. This means that they are able to access the data from the workstations of the employees randomly. This shows that the IT department cleaves to an Orwellian authority over the activities of the employees with regards to their use of computers and ICT-related applications. They can see every single element that the employee takes part in through electronic monitoring.   The problem in this scenario is that the privacy of the employees may be compromised. There is actually a legislation that is actually in effect in UK with regards to the human rights of the employees. To illustrate, the Human Rights Act, ratified in 2000, incorporates the civil liberties that has been instituted in the European Convention on Human Rights. Specifically, Article 8 of the said legislation specifies the right of the employee for privacy. This means that it would be illegal for the employer to oversee the communications of the employees within the work area if there is no consent coming from the latter. Thus, the employee must be fully aware that his/her actions through the use of ICT-related applications are monitored by the employer. ( 2001) Indeed this right of the individual to privacy extends to the work area; however this does not discount the right of the employer to make sure that the employees are indeed doing their jobs adequately. The basic premise that the employees have to be informed that they are being monitored is enough to create a firm ground in implementing any form of electronic monitoring.    A.   Email libel   The case in which an employee has circulated a defamatory email towards a certain member of the Information Security team reveals an inappropriate behaviour and shows unprofessional conducts on the part of the employee who sent the message. Although its intention is to illicit humour, the said individual still utilized company property to disseminate such a message. The problem in this context is that the employee that sent the message does not represent only himself, in using SC property in carrying out his/her deeds, his actions appear to represent the SC as a whole. Thus, this creates a bad image for the company. It represents a bad reputation for the company.   The said employee may claim his/her freedom of expression, however, one must take into consideration that in his/her exercises of this freedom, and another individual’s right has been violated. Moreover, the company has the authority to monitor this kind of employee activity as reflected in the recent Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (2000). Specifically, the interception of communication has been noted as among the elements that has been covered by the act. This provides the employer a much wider area to wield his authority in terms of monitoring the employees. Specifically, telephone calls and emails, regardless of whether it is work-related or otherwise, are among the things that the employer could do with the use of this piece of legislation.   There is indeed some presence of conflict in the stated legislations in this part of the report. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, as stated in the previous part, is totally in conflict with the  2000. However, this report continues to hold on to its contention that the knowledge of the employees that they are being subject to such monitoring and surveillance balances the said inconsistency. Although it is established here that the company has indeed the power to monitor the employees, it is much better for the company to consider installing a means of order, or a set of guidelines for that matter, in terms of monitoring and surveillance.           B.   Internet use   The extent to which this issue is related is not limited to the access of pornographic material. The free use of internet, devoid of any firewall or any other security tool opens the company to a lot of possible misdemeanours carried out by the employees. The free use of the internet may allow the employees to use a considerable amount of software that may not be licensed to the company. This means that if this happens, the company may well be open to major copyright infringement lawsuits in the near future. Frequent downloading of “free” application and “trial” applications often triggers these instances. ( 1998) Again, the company have to install a surveillance program that would be able to avert this kind of activities.     V.  Data Protection   Based on the findings of the investigation, it appears that there are some inconsistencies in the compliance in the Data Protection Act of 1998. This reveals that that the company has failed to manage the data of the employees in the company. Given that a report is made by the Data Protection Commissioner, it means that SC has been irresponsibly processing the data of the individuals connected and employed in the company. Although the said legislation does not entail any sanction and serves only as a set of guidelines for employer use, the company, SC, should not have failed to these take into consideration. To deal with this situation, several recommendations are placed in the end of the paper.     VI.           External contracts   The findings of the investigation uncovered that the target company has implemented external contract with other companies. The problem with the said set of circumstances is that there were no apparent set of files that depicts the kind of company or any company profile whatsoever in the archives of SC. The following will present a set of findings that will reveal some information of the two companies that SC have acquired an external contract with, moreover the data acquired in this section are basically taken from the Internet.     A.   Scolarest Catering Based on the website of the said firm (), it is a company that specializes in catering services. It provides its food services primarily in educational institutions. Apparently, though the said company’s target market includes schools and state colleges, its services are not restricted to them. Probably, SC must have taken this company to cater for its cafeteria.   However, a study from the website of  (2005), objections on the sizes of the means as well as the quality of the food they are serving from instructors and educators of a school in Wandsworth were made in May of 2004. There have also been reports, as stated in the same website, that the food choices were not meeting the standards of the government. This has been also reported in Camden. As a result these institutions decided to severe their contractual ties with Scolarest.         B.   Pegasus Security and Parking Control   There is not much information about the said company available in the internet. However, according to its website, it is a provider of private security and manned guarding. ( 2005) Apparently, SC may have hired the said company to provide security services for the establishments owned by the company.   VII.        Recommendations A.   Confidential information   In the condition of SC, it is safe to assume that there is indeed likelihood that lay-offs will be taking place once the acquisition has taken place. Otherwise, if D’Ausecours, deemed lay-offs unnecessary the recommendations in this section would still be imperative for the company. It would be advisable for D’Ausecours to force SC to make the employees sign a new contract, one which contains a garden leave clause and an implied duty of fidelity.   The issuance of a garden leave clause presents the employer to protect their interests the moment an employee is terminated in his position. This is the course of action taken in the case of  [1989] IRLR 84. In this scenario, the employee will be given a fair treatment considering that he/she will still be remunerated regardless of a long time of compulsory absence or even after the notice of termination has been given to him/her by the employer. In this context, the employee is still covered the stipulations in his/her contract implying not to compete, breach confidence, or any other stipulation noted in the contract. This is enforceable considering that the employee continues to be bound by the contract that he/she has signed with the company. The inclusion of this provision on the contracts of the said employees is imperative. This is because the employer would find it difficult to impose this type of action if a contractual provision in absent. This means that without such a clause in the contract, the employer has no right whatsoever to compel an employee to a garden leave.   Another recommendation in this aspect is to place a clause in the said contract unambiguously stating an implied duty of fidelity. As stated in the case of  [1895] 2 QB 315, the said concept provides the obligation on the part of the employee to establish an “honest, faithful and loyal service.” If a clause stating this term is placed in the contract then the employees are bound by the fact that they are to steer clear of any exposure of information that belongs to the firm in the course of their employment. This even goes further on implying that the said obligation extends when the employees’ services are severed from the company. ( , 1986) Although the said clause could only cover a much constricted range with regards to the still “unterminated” employee, the firm will be able to protect information such as customer connections and other data that could be considered a trade secret, as defined in the above discussions. ( , 1986)     B.   Copyright and intellectual property   The use of an open source by the target company, SC, may have spawned from the context of convenience and greater access for the employees of the company. However, the employment of such a technique has opened the company at risk from stealing their own intellectual properties. There is no problem in placing their projects in an application revealing an open source; the problem in their situation is that the information that they are using and eventually presenting as their won finished product is an amalgamation of works from entities both internal and external of the company. In this sense, as stated in the earlier discussion, they are exposed to possible lawsuits, both by them and against them. D’Ausecours should take into consideration several courses of action in order to avert any possible lawsuit once they have acquired SC as their own.   The company should decide whether they want to continue employing the open source as their means of application. If they decide to keep the use of the open source, then they have to change the operations in completing a project. Though the employment of contractors and other companies to help their employees could still be used, it is important for the company to oblige them to sign a contract before any exchange of information takes place. In doing so, the company would be able to hold these employed contractors and other companies liable once they are slapped by a lawsuit claiming a breach of the intellectual property rights of another entity. Moreover, the firm would be able to hold these external entities legally responsible if any of the projects that they have completed oddly turn out in other companies.   The change of compelling contractors and other companies to sign a contract prior to the commencement of a project is imperative. However, if the heads of D’Ausecours deem it unnecessary, an alternative nonetheless is the employment of software that could not be used by other entities other than the company itself. To this extent, the company have to use encrypted codes in order to keep their intellectual property protected. Although they could still employ the open source in the process of completing a project, it would be necessary for the company to convert the said information into an encrypted format so as the other companies may not regard it as open and free for access.   Moreover, the company should also get acquainted with its intellectual property rights in order to take the necessary precautions. This will reinforce the safety of their work as well as free them from any other possible lawsuits coming from other companies.               C.   Records, staff surveillance and monitoring   Monitoring and surveillance in this context is limited to the use of computers and ICT-related applications in the work area. To a certain extent, this allows the company to monitor whether the employees are performing at par with the required performance level set by the company. With reference to the work of  (1998), the company could install a video display terminal (VDT) that would be able to clearly state the actions of the employees in their workstations, including the number of keystrokes that they have made and the time that they have spent away from their workstation.   However, it is still more convenient for the company to present a vigilant culture for its employees. The management should encourage the employees to work towards the company goal and motivate them in such a way that they report any kind of misdemeanour that their co-workers carry out in the workplace. This is a more effective method given that there is a sense of empowerment given to the employees.        1.     Email libel The D’Ausecours, the moment they decide to acquire SC, should install a directive, a set of guidelines that would be accessible to employees. The contents of the said guidelines should include the proper use of company email and the appropriate content of such messages. Moreover, in this directive, the company must stress that the use of such devices does not only reflect the behaviour of a single individual but represents the level of professionalism present in the company as a whole. Sanctions should also be indicated once an employee is caught.   2.     Internet use   As stated in the earlier discussion, the issue is not limited to the access of porn sites and other perverse web areas. The free use of the internet and the ready access to porn sites reveals that the target company has no firewall installed in their system. This means that they are open to any form of hacking or intrusion in their database. Upon acquisition of the said firm, access to the internet should not be limited, however it is required for D’Ausecours to install a means to protect the database of the company and monitor the sites that employees are clicking on the time of their jobs. Moreover, it is the duty of the said company to inform the employees that they are indeed being monitored.   D.   Data Protection   In the context of the Data Protection Act, the discussion is practically connected to monitoring of employees. At this point, if D’Ausecours intends to go through with the acquisition, they should create an impact analysis with regards to both the advantages and disadvantages of monitoring the employees. If there are any apparent adverse effect on the employee, like that of any inconsistencies with the Data Protection Act of 1998, then the said foreseeable effect have to be justified. Moreover, they must ensure that the data acquired from the monitoring activities have to be used only in the context of monitoring and nothing else. The moment a serious act is detected, appropriate actions should be taken.   References Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES

I. Introduction The following report is a result of the observation and analysis of the particular divisions of the c...