Words: 491
Business Ethics Case Shirley Jones was Shirley Partridge on The Partridge Family. Ethical Case 3. 4 Within this case little three year old Joshua was mailed an offer by times magazine. Within the see through window of the envelope there was an offer stating that if the recipient only opened that letter that they would receive a free calculator watch. After his mother opened the envelope and read further it seemed that not only opening the envelope but purchasing the magazine was required to claim this prize. The first question that this case asks is did Time act ethically in this case.
My answer to this is no, the displayed false advertisement by stating all that the recipient needed to do was simply open the envelope to receive their “gift”. They were giving false information as not only did you have to open the document but you needed to subscribe to their magazine in order to receive the calculator watch. The next question that was asked was what a frivolous lawsuit is. A frivolous lawsuit is when a case is brought to court and it is lacking substance and not worth serious consideration. Was Joshua’s lawsuit a frivolous lawsuit? In my opinion no it was not as Time Inc. eeded to be shown that false advertisement is not going to be tolerated. Lastly the final question in this ethical case study is was the claimed damages of $15 million excessive? I believe that this was not excessive as when you are dealing with a well known profitable company the only way you can get through to them is by hitting them where it hurts and that is at the bank. By being awarded that settlement I am sure that Time Inc would not only try to appeal the decision but it would make the company remember for future reference that giving false advertisement can cost them a ton of money.
Ethical Case 3. 5 The national inquirer is a tabloid magazine that’s only interest is to get the juiciest dirt on any and all celebrity person whether it is plastic surgery, whose dating who, who has a drug habit, or who is having troubles with the law. The next question is was it ethical for National Enquirer to try and avoid a suit in California the answer is yes, it was ethical to try and avoid a suit in California as it is the second highest market for its magazine and if it was found that they were guilty of slander they could lose part of their market as their customers would know that they could not rust the information within the magazine. The last question was are the defendants subject to a suit in California, the answer is that yes the defendants are subject to a suit in California per the concurrent jurisdiction as parties from different states can file suits against each other to be heard by the state courts.