William & Mary Business Law Review最新文献

{"title":"How Google Perceives Customer Privacy, Cyber, E-Commerce, Political and Regulatory Compliance Risks","authors":"L. Trautman","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3067298","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3067298","url":null,"abstract":"By now, almost every business has an internet presence. What are the major risks perceived by those engaged in Internet businesses? What potential risks, if they become reality, may cause substantial increases in operating costs or threaten the very survival of the enterprise? This article discusses the relevant annual report disclosures from Alphabet Inc. (parent of Google), along with other Google documents. Most of the descriptive language to follow is excerpted directly from Alphabet’s (Google) regulatory filings. After discussing recent changes in the cyber-threat landscape, these disclosure materials are woven into a logical presentation and provide supplemental sources for those who desire a deeper look (usually in my footnotes) of any particular aspect. I’ve sought to present a roadmap with these materials that shows Google’s struggle to optimize their business performance while navigating through a complicated maze of regulatory compliance concerns and issues involving governmental jurisdictions throughout the world. International cyber crime and risk issues follow, with an examination of anti-money laundering, counter-terrorist, and other potential illegal activity laws. \u0000The value proposition offered here is disarmingly simple at no out-of-pocket cost, the reader has an opportunity to invest a few hours to read and reflect upon the Alphabet Inc. (Google) multiple-million-dollar research, investment and documentation of perceived Internet, e-commerce, cyber, IT, privacy, and electronic payment system risks. Hopefully, this will prove of value to those interested in the rapidly changing dynamics of (1) privacy issues, (2) Internet e-commerce and site operations, or (3) those engaged in regulatory compliance activities.","PeriodicalId":364774,"journal":{"name":"William & Mary Business Law Review","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127889999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Pragmatist's View of Promissory Law with a Focus on Consent and Reliance","authors":"R. Hillman","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/2fkyt","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/2fkyt","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses Professor Nate Oman's excellent new book, \"The Dignity of Commerce,\" which makes an impressive case for how markets can produce \"desirable\" outcomes for society. In addition to a comprehensive account of what he calls \"virtues\" of markets, such as their tendency to produce cooperation, trust, and wealth, the book is full of useful and persuasive supporting information and discussions. \u0000Oman is not only a fan of markets, but he asserts that markets are the \"center\" of contract theory, and provide its normative foundation. Elaborating, Oman concludes that \"contract law exists primarily to support markets\" and that \"contracts are valuable because they facilitate commerce and extend the reach of markets. It is their beneficial consequences that justify the enforcement of contracts.\" \u0000The article focuses on two of the many important issues generated by Oman's thesis. First, has Oman done enough to convince that markets are what he calls the \"centerpiece\" of contract law? Second, does his effort to present what is essentially a unitary normative theory of contract handcuff his analysis of particular contract issues and doctrines? I will argue that markets are important and contract law should and does play an important role in supporting markets. However, we should not demote other visions of contract law, but see them all as important ingredients in understanding the subject. By largely espousing a unitary, integrative theory of contract law, Oman may have boxed himself into a corner that leads to a few debatable propositions, including with respect to consent to boilerplate and reliance on promises, which the article takes up in some detail. \u0000The article concludes that \"The Dignity of Commerce\" makes a solid case for the importance and virtues of markets and is rich in discussion and detail. As with any excellent work, it makes the reader ponder accepted wisdom and adds to the reader's perspective. Further, in making his case for markets, Oman does an excellent job of introducing, discussing and debunking many counterarguments. My effort in this article is only to reflect on whether the market argument really can capture the entire contract-law field.","PeriodicalId":364774,"journal":{"name":"William & Mary Business Law Review","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131680718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Social Enterprise Revolution in Corporate Law: A Primer on Emerging Corporate Entities in Europe and the United States and the Case for the Benefit Corporation","authors":"Robert T. Esposito","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2134022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2134022","url":null,"abstract":"Remarkably, in the face of a global recession, the social enterprise sector continued to experience extraordinary growth in both financial support and the number of newly authorized corporate entities aimed at social entrepreneurs who seek to use the power of business to simultaneously achieve profit and social or environmental benefits. This Article highlights recent developments in the social enterprise movement in Europe and the United States and focuses on the emergence of a surprisingly broad range of newly authorized corporate entities on both continents in response to the needs of social entrepreneurs. These include social cooperatives and the community interest company in Europe, as well as the L3C, the flexible purpose corporation, the social purpose corporation, and the benefit corporation in the United States. In so doing, this Article emphasizes the truly international scope of the social enterprise movement and explains the growing divergence in approaches to social enterprise between continental Europe and the United States. This Article suggests that the benefit corporation, which imposes a new duty to consider stakeholder interests, is currently the most effective vehicle through which social entrepreneurs can ensure their blended value goals are being considered and achieved. This Article concludes by responding to critiques of profit-distribution in social enterprise, making the case for the benefit corporation, and suggesting some statutory and tax reforms to further foster the social enterprise revolution.","PeriodicalId":364774,"journal":{"name":"William & Mary Business Law Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131758030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Constitution, The Roberts Court & Business: The Significant Business Impact of the 2011-2012 Supreme Court Term","authors":"Corey A Ciocchetti","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2073360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2073360","url":null,"abstract":"The 2011-2012 Supreme Court term created quite the media buzz. The Affordable Care Act cases and the controversial Arizona immigration law dominated the headlines. But the term also included other fascinating yet less sensationalized cases. The Court heard its fair share of criminal law controversies involving derelict defense attorneys and prosecutors as well as civil procedure disputes involving qualified immunity for witness in grand jury proceedings and private parties assisting the government in litigation. The justices also entertained arguments on a federal law allowing United States citizens born in Jerusalem to have “Israel” stamped as their birthplace on a passport. The Secretary of State refused arguing that the practice would inflame tensions in an already volatile Middle East. Another case pitted the First Amendment right to lie about receiving military honors against the Stolen Valor Act prohibiting that type of dishonest speech. A case from Montana hearkened back to 1889 and implicated the Equal Footing Doctrine – a Constitutional provision granting territory to states upon entering the Union. Texas crafted new electoral maps based on the 2010 census and soon found them scrutinized under the Voting Rights Act. In all, the term was extraordinary because most of its cases revolved around topics ripped from the headlines and touched on areas of public policy relevant to Americans in 2012 and beyond. The term was also compelling because of its impact on the business arena. The justices granted certiorari in fourteen business cases, eight of which were cherry picked for this article. Each case chosen covered a classic business law topic, generated strong interest within the business community, contained predominately business-focused facts, and had a connection to a business-related constitutional provision/amendment or statute. These eight cases provide the best glimpse into the Roberts Court’s most recent stance on topics important to the business community. This article evaluates these cases in depth and proposes the following business impact theory of the term: (1) the Court’s opinion in each case had as strong pro-business slant with business interests receiving fifty out of fifty-two potential votes. This slant is significantly different from the previous term where the Court unanimously voted against business interests several times; (2) these pro-business decisions did not occur in ordinary, run of the mill cases. Instead the impact of these decisions is magnified because they involved subjects critical to America’s economic recovery; (3) perhaps surprisingly, the Court’s liberal-leaning justices voted with the Court’s conservatives in twenty out of a possible twenty-two opportunities. They did so in cases that presented compelling arguments from both a conservative and liberal perspective and where the facts allowed for a strong four-justice dissent; (4) perhaps unsurprisingly, the Court proved willing to narrow or expand Const","PeriodicalId":364774,"journal":{"name":"William & Mary Business Law Review","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116486206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}