the act of Carney and Deb Company storing sensitive information in electronic devices such as smartphones, laptops, and flash disks among others can be a violation of the business ethics and obligation

the act of Carney and Deb Company storing sensitive information in electronic devices such as smartphones, laptops, and flash disks among others can be a violation of the business ethics and obligation.

Business Law: Carney and Deb Company

  1. Business ethic is important in the decision making of any This is because it ensures that any business decision and activity do not crisscross the set business standards or violates the laws in any case. Business information is essential to service oriented enterprises. Most of the organizations that offer services to varied client need to have detailed information concerning their client so that they can be able to offer them with high quality and reliable services. However, some of the data that those companies seek are private and confidential and need to be kept secure at all cost. Therefore, the company should ensure the safety of such information at all time. Consequently, the act of Carney and Deb Company storing sensitive information in electronic devices such as smartphones, laptops, and flash disks among others can be a violation of the business ethics and obligation. The information stored in such electronic devices can easily leak to the public. Such devices can easily be hacked by cyber criminals, which may damage the company reputation (Clarkson, Miller, and Cross 97). In addition, this may, in turn, lead to poor performance of the affected organization. Thus, the transfer of information to electronic devices violate business ethic.
  2. There are many circumstances that can make a company or an organization to face a lawsuit. For instance, offering goods and services that are sub-standard and which cause harm to the consumers can cause the company to face the law. In most case, the organization can be sued when it cause injuries to consumers because of illegitimate business conduct (Clarkson, Miller and Cross 118). The act of Data Analytic Inc. placing false advertisements concerning e-products is against the law. The Data Analytic Inc. is supposed to be charged and held accountable of defamation. The Federal Law Can Spam Act 2003 prohibits all activities such as the use of false, deceiving, or wrong information released to the public by an individual or company through emails and spam (Clarkson, Miller and Cross 177). Under punitive damage of the tort cases, the data analytic Inc. is supposed to face punishment for the wrong act. This is because it did the immoral act intentionally with the aim of maximizing their profits by insulting the product of its competitor. Consequently, it means that the competition was not fair, the company is supposed to compensate e-products for the losses incurred and tarnishing their name.
  3. Any enterprise that is producing and distributing goods and services to the consumers or any other business entity must be responsible for any damage that it could cause to its consumers, environment, or any other party. Under liabilities, Fazio the bystander is liable to be compensated by the Express Deliveries because their track caused the accident that injured him. However, to be compensated he must show that the tract was able to ram into the gas station due to the negligence of its driver who left the track at free gear while she was delivering the products to the nearby store. According to Clarkson, Miller, and Cross (142), if the manufacturer is unable to practice the due care any person who is harmed by the company’s product has the mandate to sue the company for any injuries caused by the company negligence. Therefore, in the case, Fazio must show all the detailed information of all scenes of the accident show how the track was the key cause of the accident that injured him?
  4. No fault compensation program was designed to ensure that some of the products mostly the medical products such as curative drug and vaccine are preferred and used by the consumer for their health benefits. Although these products have considerable benefits to the consumer, they may have some adverse side effect to other customers. Therefore, no fault compensation program give the consumer the legal right to sue any manufacturer producing such product to be compensated for any damage incurred from the use of such product. Quint is right to sue the Replacement Limb LCC and demand for compensation from the side effect of their product prosthetic. Replacement Limb can successfully assert in these case because the Prosthetic Leg and Arms Act hence liable for any case against them concerning their injuries caused by their products protect their product. Moreover, the company would have a higher chance of winning the case if the damage caused by the products was reasonable. Secondly, if the accuser lacks the detailed evidence concerning the danger of the product since the time, it was prescribed to him. Lastly, if the product was delivered in the safe condition and subsequently caused damage because of being mishandled by the consumer, the LCC is not liable for the compensation (Clarkson, Miller, and Cross 145).

 

Work cited

Clarkson, Kenneth, Roger Miller, and Frank Cross. Business Law: Texts and Cases. Nelson Education, 2014.

 

For a Customized Paper on the above or Related Topic, Place Your Order Now!

What We Guarantee: 

  • 100% Original Paper
  • On-Time Delivery Guarantee
  • Automatic Plagiarism Check
  • 100% Money-Back 
  • 100% Privacy and Confidentiality
  • 24/7 Support Service

the act of Carney and Deb Company storing sensitive information in electronic devices such as smartphones, laptops, and flash disks among others can be a violation of the business ethics and obligation

Leave a Reply