an inflated price; the plaintiffs brought suit to have the purchase contract declared unconscionable and prevailed. The courts also act to protect certainty and the durability of systems. Anti-trust cases are an example of decisions in this area. In State Oil Co. v. Kahn (1997), the U.S. Supreme Court argued that the purpose of the anti-trust law is to protect competition (Miller & Jentz, 2000).
Question 3. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 is legislation enacted in response to high profile domestic financial scandals to protect shareholders and the general public from accounting errors and fraudulent practices (Tech Target, 2006). It does not affect foreign corporations operating in the United States unless these corporations are also listed and sold on an exchange that is regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Foreign companies are entitled to exemption from the rules of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on the basis of their place of incorporation and the fact that they are subject to the reporting and accounting rules of the country in which they are legally constituted. They should be required as a condition of doing business in the United States to comply with the three rules of Sarbanes-Oxley on maintenance of records, retaining records, and the storage of records.
Question 4. In Kasky v. Nike, the trial court regarded the constitutional distinction between commercial and noncommercial speech to be dispositive. The distinction revolves around the issue of who is speaking. In this case, Nike presented a public relations campaign defending the benefits of its Asian factories and portraying the company as proactive with respect to overseas labor standards.
The Court held that Nike was well within its rights in defending itself against allegations of misconduct (Kasky v. Nike..., 2011). The California Supreme Court held that Nike had not engaged in unlawful business practice in violation of the...