Posted by Natasha Dizon. 

Today, technology is very advanced with data that can be accessed and tampered with and though a simple passcode or a touch of a finger, your phone can be opened. Smartphones are something that everyone has these days. iPhones have iOS 8 and it can be hacked into through “backdoors.”

Recently, Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik are two residents of California who are being investigated by the FBI. They are suspects for being in contact with the Islamic State. They are also suspects in assisting the shooting that took the lives of 14 innocent people and injuring 22 others. Farook was suspected of using his iPhone 5C to get in contact with other terrorists. Therefore, investigators want to tap into his phone, and unlock the data. The couple died in a shootout with the police. The FBI believes that they were part of terrorism.

In my opinion, yes I think that it is wrong to hack someone’s phone without their permission. Apple has a point where if they do it for them, the company would be pressured or expected to do the same for everyone. By doing that, the whole protection and lock screen code would be completely pointless. But in this certain circumstance, I would agree that the phone should be unlocked only because the lives of millions of people are in danger. If the people are being suspected of murder and terrorism, the right of privacy should not an option.

Natasha is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Posted by Maleesha Silva.

Anna Alaburda was a 2008 graduate of Thomas Jefferson School of Law (TJSL). She graduated with honors and had even went on to pass the California Bar Exam. However, she was unable to find a suitable job after graduation and decided to sue TJSL. The plaintiff claimed the defendant, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, committed the act of fraud. She states they lied about employment information after graduation and how much graduates actually made after attending TJSL.

Alaburda “sought $92,192 in lost income” and “$32,475” in tuition (Zaretsky). However, she ended up losing her case in a 9-3 verdict. Part of the reason the jury ended up siding with the Thomas Jefferson School of Law was because Alaburda had been offered a job before after graduation, yet rejected it. They probably felt that this conflicted with her claim that the school lied about how many students are employed after graduation, due to the fact that she herself was offered a job.

In my opinion, I feel Alaburda should have won her case if she was able to prove that the Thomas Jefferson School of Law had actually committed fraud by falsifying information about their employment rates and graduation salaries. However, it is apparent by the outcome of this court case that she was not able to sufficiently prove her claim.

Maleesha is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Andres Garcia.

On Wednesday March 2, 2016, Sports Authority decided it was time to file for bankruptcy and close almost a third of its total locations. Sports Authority has been crowned the fourth largest U.S. sports store.

The decision came after the company failed to pay a $20 million payment of January. In the next couple months, numerous stores will be closed and leases associated with those locations will be removed. The company disclosed more than one billion in liabilities and assets that have been estimated between $500,000 and $1 billion dollars. The business organization has planned to borrow almost $595 million to maintain its operation during the time of bankruptcy.

This is an unfortunate situation for Sports Authority, filing for bankruptcy under Chapter 11, suggests that the company has a concrete plan for the future. Sports Authority believes it is best to reorganize and pay its creditors in the near future.

The company understands that if it borrows money today in the long run they will turn that debt into net profits. It is difficult to measure the factors that influenced the business to go through a down sloping hill. However, the company must adjust to new marketing techniques in order to be successful in the coming years. It may also want to adopt to new consumer expectations and change in taste. If Sports Authority exceeds the techniques of its key competitors, it will be able to return to business and create desired profits.

Andres is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Andres Garcia.

Following the explicit shooting in San Bernardino, California, the FBI insisted Apple create a software that would aid them in their process of investigation. The proposed software would be inserted into the iPhone device belonging to one of the suspects in the mass shooting. The FBI asked Apple, Inc. after they could not guess the shooter’s password.

Apple, Inc. opposed the request and did not want to search their servers for the correct password. However, on Tuesday February 16, 2016, the court ruled that Apple must assist the FBI by handing out such private and confidential information. The decision enraged Apple CEO, Tim Cook, he stated that the verdict would invade the privacy of Apple customers.

I would definitely agree with Apple CEO, Tim Cook; the government ruling will greatly affect many personal lives. The decision may be unethical. I believe the government was in favor of the FBI. The court only looked at how the decision will positively affect the FBI at the moment. However, there can be harsher repercussion for individuals in our society. By granting the FBI permission to search someone’s data and information, the US government is essentially attacking a person’s privacy and security. The decision will sooner than later lead to more hackers infiltrating our personal devices.

Andres is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Abul Hasnat Juned.

Mr. Valdez, a veteran logistics executive of Amazon.com, has been sued by Amazon.com because of violating a non-compete clause. That clause prohibits him from joining any rival for 18 months after leaving Amazon. Valdez worked as a senior executive of the operation department in Amazon, whose job was to supervise Amazon’s international supply chain expansion.

Valdez did that for 16 years until he was hired by Target. He was appointed as a seasoned supply chain leader in Target for concentrating on Amazon’s international supply chain expansion. Amazon made allegations against Valdez saying he has shared information in a highly competitive area for both companies, which was about moving and shipping products in the most effective manner.

However, according to Amazon, Mr. Valdez will take advantage of his knowledge of Amazon’s strategy for e-commerce by revealing it to Target. Target is stating that they are very cautious about not getting any proprietary information about Amazon from him. On the other hand, Amazon is saying that trade secrets were shared by him during the interview process.

It is also a matter of fact that Target is trying to improve their e-commerce section. Although Target is behind in the market of e-commerce, it is working to increase its sales and to do that it has signed with an online delivery service Instacart.

Instacart will deliver the Target groceries to the customers in some cities. Information about the time when Valdez left Amazon is not stated in the lawsuit. However, Valdez received the confirmation from his attorney to start at Target from March 28, 2016, according to the lawsuit.

Abul is an accounting major at the Felicinao School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Abul Hasnat Juned.

Apple Inc. and the U.S. government are headed to court because the government is trying to force Apple to hack into the iPhone of the dead San Bernardino attacker, Syed Rizwan Farook. The reason why the government’s wants to access Farook’s phone is that it may contain evidence regarding the San Bernardino shooting in which he killed 14 people.

Investigators are trying to find out what happened and also if there were any other collaborators from ISIS. Last month, Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym ordered Apple to create software to help the FBI disable security features on the phone. Also, the magistrate judge ordered Apple to make software that erases all the information from the phone if a password is wrongly entered more than ten times. If Apple creates such software, the FBI would be able to electronically run possible combinations to open the phone without losing data.

On the other hand, Apple risks losing business if they help the government in unlocking phones, because it would undermine the privacy of its customers. Apple wants to show that they are true to their customers. By taking a stand, they might bring in more consumers. There is also another risk for the Apple Company in unlocking the phone because phones could possibly be accessible to hackers and other countries. Companies, such as, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft are offering their support for Apple and using it as a market strategy to gain respect from the public.

Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said, “It’s too much for the government to conscript a company into writing code that undermines the security of the products they sell.” While the government says that Apple has helped them to extract data from such phones at least 70 times for law enforcement, Apple says the government is trying to force them to create a software that does not exist. Apple is arguing that the government is violating the company’s constitutional rights by threatening the privacy of its customers. Apple is taking a stand not only for their customers’ privacy, but also for the company’s profit because if they help the government to access the phone, their business profits would rapidly drop.

Abul is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Natalie Dorley.

The case of Sherman v. United States looks like a case of entrapment. Entrapment is when a “law enforcement official” forces another individual to perform an illegal activity that they would not normally do (if they were not under forced pretenses).

The defendant ended up being charged with the sale of narcotics. “A government informant and defendant initially met in a hospital where they both were being treated for drug addiction.” Since both the defendant and the government informant were very vulnerable due to their drug addiction, it is no surprise that one of the parties looked for a way to fulfill their addiction.

The government lured the defendant by expressing how he was suffering and continuously “pressed the issue.” The defendant eventually gave in to the informant. He got in contact with his drug supplier and gave the drugs to the informant. At trial, the defendant claimed entrapment as his defense. The main issue in court was whether or not if the conviction should be based on entrapment at all.

In my opinion, I feel as if this case was a case of entrapment. It is the law enforcement’s job to protect the public from crime. The fact that the official pressed on forcing someone else to get drugs for them is in violation of their duty.

The holding stated this, “The informant clearly induced the crime in this case. The informant attempted multiple times to create the crime after multiple rejections and did so in the context of a recovering drug addict, whose ability to refuse was comparatively reduced.”

The informant was well aware of their actions. The defendant had every right to claim this as entrapment.

Natalie is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Hijab Sheikh.

A long case of a Louisiana man and woman’s car accident in 2014 ended on Tuesday, March 29, 2016. The jury in Manhattan listened to them for more than two hours, blaming their accident over a defective ignition switch while the GM lawyer said there was no evidence that there was a flaw in the ignition switch.

Since 2014, there were more 30 million GM automaker recalls. There were hundreds of claims made against GM automaker. “Under certain conditions, the ignition switch can slip out of the on position, making it difficult to steer or stop as the car stalls” (Niemeiser). GM says that they fixed this issue. But if that’s the case, then why have there been so many recalls? Instead of acknowledging the fact that there was a flaw in the ignition switch, GM blamed the accident on “a key chain pulled down by the weight of other keys might have pulled it out of position” (Nieumeiser).

Randall Jackson, Plaintiff’s attorney, said the GM lawyer’s statement doesn’t make sense. GM attorney Mike Brock blamed the accident on ice and claimed that there wasn’t any major damages to the vehicle or the passengers; there were minor scrapes on the bumper, but that is about it.

GM announced the following statistics, settling “1,385 death and injury cases for $275 million and a class-action shareholders’ lawsuit for $300 million. The company paid nearly $600 million to settle 399 claims made to a fund it established. Those claims covered 124 deaths and 275 injuries.” (Nieumeiser).

GM rejected 90 perecent of the claims that were made, out of the 4,343 they received.

Bibliography

Neumeiser, Larry. “FindLaw | Legal News & Information.” Lawyers Clash over Ignition Switch Claims in 2nd GM Case. Find Law, 29 Mar. 2016. Web. 31 Mar. 2016.

Hijab is a public health major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Brianna Montalvo.

Since 2014, General Motors has been having ignition switch issues with their vehicles which has lead to 30 million recalls. As of Tuesday, March 29 2016, a jury in New York City has yet to reach a verdict on the ignition switch controversy. This case was brought to the jury by a lawyer who is defending a man and a woman whom were in an accident on a New Orleans bridge back in 2014. The couple claim the ignition switch of their GM vehicle is to blame for the accident.

As stated, “Hundreds of claims remain against the automaker after GM revealed two years ago that it had continued to sell flawed vehicles for more than a decade after discovering an ignition switch defect in Chevy Cobalts and other small cars,” (Neumeister). It has been said that the ignition switch itself can slip out of position making it difficult to steer or stop the vehicle, which then would cause the vehicle to stall. GM has claimed they fixed their problem, which I believe is highly doubtful. The plaintiff’s attorney claimed that a key chain had pulled the weight of the keys down which would cause the switch to be pulled out of position, initiating the car to stall and cause an accident. General Motor’s attorney blamed ice as the probable cause in the accident, since there were no serious injuries or dents to the car, only a few minor scratches on the bumper.

Although a verdict has not been reached, I would not be surprised if the ignition switch in fact was the cause of the accident. In September of 2015, General Motors declared it had settled 1,385 death and injury cases for $275 million and a class-action shareholders’ lawsuit for $300 million. The company has given millions towards a numerous amount of claims. $600 million was paid to settle 399 claims to a fund GM established. 124 deaths, as well as 275 injuries were covered with those claims.

I feel that it was unethical of General Motors to continue selling their vehicles with the ignition switch defect. They claim they fixed it, but I do not believe it is something to fix that easily and quickly. There have been hundreds of deaths and injuries due to the ignition switch recall. They will always get business since vehicles will always be in demand, but I believe they should fix the ignition switch so that they wouldn’t have to deal with so many recalls, as well as have any deaths or injuries on their conscious.

Brianna is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Alexa Christie.

In Frankfort, Kentucky, Attorney General Andy Beshear sues Volkswagen claiming the automaker’s diesel emissions cheating scheme violated the state’s consumer protection law. There were 3,800 vehicles registered in Kentucky with this defect. The lawsuit was filed in a state court. “”We have a very strong law that is meant to prevent companies like this … from making an outright lie that they then use to sell what’s a pretty expensive product,” Beshear said at a state Capitol news conference.” Beshear thinks that Volkswagen should be held accountable for this scheme of false advertisement. Last year, 600,000 cars were sold in the United States with software that was designed to cheat on required emissions tests.

Volkswagen was trying to advertise that their customers, who wanted a “green” car were getting one, when in fact they were not. A Volkswagen spokeswomen announced that the company, Volkswagen, was working with federal environmental regulators to resolve this problem. Texas, New Mexico, New Jersey, and West Virginia were also filing separate lawsuits against Volkswagen. The company has received more than $20 billion in fines from state and federal regulators. In September, Volkswagen admitted to using illegal software installed in their “clean diesel” engines.

Alexa is a business administration major with a concentration in management at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.