Clark_11e-AM-Ch19.doc - C HAPTER 1 9 E-CONTRACTS AND...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
149 C HAPTER 19 E-C ONTRACTS AND E-S IGNATURES A NSWER TO C RITICAL A NALYSIS Q UESTION IN THE F EATURE INSIGHT INTO THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT—CRITICAL THINKING—INSIGHT INTO POLITICS (PAGE 380) There are about two hundred sovereign nations in the world today, but only thirty have signed the Cyber-Crime Convention. Why do you think so many nations’ governments have been reluctant to be bound by the convention ? Individual nations might believe that the regulation will hinder their economic development. Their governments might view the regulation as an attempt to interfere with their sovereign rights. There may be some political inertia, especially with respect to an outside regulation that may have little effect on activities within a less developed country. Corruption is also a possibility—those who commit the proscribed acts may be able, in some countries, to influence the enactment of laws in their favor. A NSWERS TO Q UESTIONS AT THE E NDS OF THE C ASES CASE 19.1—(PAGE 372) THE ETHICAL DIMENSION With respect to click fraud, which was the heart of Feldman’s claim in this case, what circumstances might suggest unethical behavior by Google? A lack of ethical behavior might be found if Google actually knew that there were fraudulent clicks or at least had the capacity to determine which clicks on an ad were fraudulent, did nothing to prevent click fraud, charged an advertiser for fraudulent clicks, and failed to investigate an advertiser’s complaint regarding click fraud. These circumstances would likely support imposing legal liability as well. In this case, with regard to Google’s knowledge and capacity, Feldman did “not contend that Google actually knew that there were fraudulent clicks, but allege[d] that click fraud can be tracked and prevented by computer programs, which can count the number of clicks originating from a single source and whether a sale results, and can be tracked by mechanisms on websites.”
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
150 UNIT THREE: CONTRACTS AND E-CONTRACTS Feldman also charged that Google “did not adequately warn him about click fraud.” Further he claimed, “Google informed him that it did not keep records on an advertiser's account and click history for more than the most recent three months, and that Google disclaimed liability for clicks older than sixty days.” These allegations, if proved, might also indicate ethical or legal misconduct. THE E-COMMERCE DIMENSION Under what different facts might the court have held that the plaintiff did not have reasonable notice of the terms of the agreement and thus did not assent to them? Factual differences that might have supported a decision in the plaintiff’s favor in this case relate to the online presentation of the terms and the requirement of a click to proceed. For example, the court might have ruled against the defendant if, on the Web page displaying the terms, there had been no visible indication that clicking on a button meant a user agreed to the terms of the proposed contract. There might have
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/11/2010 for the course MGT 301 taught by Professor Pederson during the Fall '10 term at SUNY Stony Brook.

Page1 / 9

Clark_11e-AM-Ch19.doc - C HAPTER 1 9 E-CONTRACTS AND...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online