HND in Business Management
1 ) MAIN PRINCIPLES THAT AFFECT THE LEGAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR Consumers: –
The primary manner to run into consumers turning information is to construct and accomplish consumer assurance and duty. The public dealingss profession should see the whole system of EC directives and ordinances covering consumer dealingss.
One of the chief issue refering is wellness and safety information and consumer representation. Right balanced should be built between the involvement of the consumers and providers.
For Consumer protection and information policy, five basic rights were established in 1975 by Council of Ministers.
1. The right to protection of wellness and safety, because goods and services must non show a hazard under normal status of usage.
2. The right to protection of economic involvement, because the buyer must be protected against opprobrious pattern of the marketer such as misdirecting advertisement, unjust contract clauses, etc.
3. The right to right, because consumers should be advised and helped in the instance of unsatisfactory merchandises and services and fleet damages for any amendss suffered.
4. The right of information and instruction, because consumers should be in place to do a pick based on full information.
5. The right of representation, because consumer organisations should be consulted on all proposed statute law impacting consumer involvement.
Many community directive and ordinances have adopted general steps and included into statute law such as:
Grocery: Lists of points and clear fact have been drawn up for preservatives used in groceries ; industry and trade description of many nutrient merchandises are besides considered.
Presentation and labeling: Specify regulations to be signify on the packaging, such as quality of ingredients, nutrient associating to diet, demoing the sum of Calories it produce with other nutritionary information labeled.
Misleading advertisement: If a consumer experience that he or she has been misled by an advertisement claim or presentation, legal action against the maker is possible.
Merchandise liability: Regulation besides states that makers are responsible for any damage their merchandises may do to the consumer. The load of cogent evidence will lie with the manufacturer.
Medicative merchandises: standardized footings on proving, rating, mandate, labeling and patent rights have been determined.
Door stairss gross revenues: buyers have a hebdomad chilling off period in the instance of contracts negotiated off from the salesmen ‘s concern premises ; the salesman is required to inform the consumer in authorship of above right of cancellation.
Information system: If authorization is determine that a merchandise has or could do harm to wellness and is curtailing its sale ; all will be informed so appropriate action can be taken.
Other ordinance screen issues, such as ; bundle Tourss, rights of air travellers, safety of playthings, consumer recognition.
Therefore, a standardised degree of protection of consumer rights has been established and at the same clip many trade barrier have been abolished through criterions and ordinances.
In 1981 Council of Ministers implemented a consumer programme to cover the period until 1986. This pressurizes the importance of the monetary value and quality ratio to consumers and tackled the jobs of the services sector. Particular meeting of Ministers was held, to discourse the consumer policy, in 1983.
GENERAL PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
1. Consumer dealingss specializer must admit the basic consumer rights to information, to audience, to freedom of pick and to safety.
2. Consumer dealingss specializer must demo rational dependability, trueness and honestness towards their company and consumers. The specializer must non utilize, which to their cognition, is false or deceptive. The specializer must avoid the usage of unsuitable patterns and methods with the rational dependability, trueness and honestness. ( Clause 3 CERP Code of Conduct ) .
3. Consumer dealingss programmes must be carried out openly: they must be readily identifiable, bear a clear indicant of their beginning and must non be handled to misdirect 3rd parties. ( Clause 4 CERP Code of Conduct )
4. Consumer dealingss specializer must non uncover any confidential information received from their clients or employees and do no usage of such information without mandate. ( Clause 7 CERP Code of Conduct )
5. Sing that a consumer is an single or a group offered or sold merchandises or services for their ain satisfaction, a consumer dealingss specializer must allow to the same single or group all after gross revenues services that they may necessitate.
6. A changeless concern on the portion of the consumer dealingss specialist with consumer rights to information and moreover the responsibility to supply information within the bounds of professional assurance must be considered as a basic duty. ( Clause 14 CERP Code of Conduct )
7. Information must be given clearly doing certain of the consumer ‘s instruction and cultural background and their cognition on merchandises and service and so forth.
8. Consumers pay no cost for the execution of consumer dealingss programme.
9. Consumers information can non be used for any market research, publicity or direct selling without the authorization of the consumer.
10. If the usage of a merchandise or a service requires proper warnings, it is the responsibility of consumer dealingss specialist to unwrap it openly.
11. Any effort to lead on consumer sentiment or its representatives is out. ( Clause 15 CERP Code of Conduct )
12. No payment or endow shall be offered or given to any individual holding an involvement in a Consumer group or Association for the intent of act uponing any act or determination of such group or association. 1 2 15
2 ) LEGAL RULES APPLICABLE TO CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS AND AGENCY:
Recognition Bureaus are private endeavors or are operated on a concerted footing by the merchandisers. Users of the service pay a fee and receive information from different beginnings
a. ) If a recognition understanding is signed and consumer wants to call off it. It can merely be done if the consumer signed the understanding in his ain place. If the understanding was dealt over the phone or at the marketer ‘s store or office, the consumer will non be able to call off the understanding
B. ) Seller will hold to direct a written notice stating consumer on how to call off the understanding. Consumer so must direct a notice to the reference given on the notice. Consumer will be entitled to the return of any sedimentation paid or goods traded in portion exchange if you cancel the understanding in clip.
c. ) A creditor, can non demand early payment, seek to acquire the goods back or stop the understanding without first functioning a written notice on you giving you 7 yearss notice of their purpose to take such action.
d. ) If the consumer have paid a tierce of the entire monetary value of the goods under HP understanding so the creditor can non take the goods back without a tribunal order. Consumer can inquire the tribunal to suspend the Return Order and accept your offer to pay the remainder of sum by installments.
e. ) If creditor takes back the goods without the tribunal order, consumer can action the creditor and claim back all the money they paid under the understanding. The creditor can non come in your premises to recover the goods without your permission.
f. ) If consumer finds an understanding unfair so the consumer can appeal to the tribunal and inquire them to amend the understanding or topographic point a new one. The tribunal will merely make this if the understanding is unreasonable or corrupt.
g. ) A marketer can be the individual who grants consumer recognition or they may set up for consumer to acquire recognition from a 3rd party or that 3rd party may set up to provide the goods to consumer. Consumer protection is that consumer can take who to action.
h. ) Consumer can either action the marketer or the supplier of the recognition or both. This helps consumer because if the marketer goes broke consumer can seek and acquire their money from the recognition supplier alternatively
I. ) Consumer must be given certain written information about the recognition understanding which must include ;
• The entire charge for recognition.
• The Annual Percentage Rate ( APR ) .
• The hard currency monetary value for the goods.
A Nigerian missive fraud, in which a missive is mailed signifier Nigeria, offers the receiver the chance to portion in a per centum of 1000000s of dollars that the writer, a self-proclaimed authorities functionary, is seeking to reassign illicitly out of Nigeria. The receiver is encouraged to direct information to the writer, such as bank name and history Numberss and other information. Some of the letters has been received via E-mail through the Internet. The strategy relies on converting a willing victim to direct money to the writer of the missive in Nigeria in several installments.
Some Tips to Avoid Nigerian Letter or “ 419 ” Fraud:
? If you receive a missive from Nigeria inquiring you to direct personal or banking information, do non answer in any mode. Send the missive to the U.S. Secret Service, your local FBI office, or the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.
? If you know person who is matching in one of these strategies, promote that individual to reach the FBI or the U.S. Secret Service every bit shortly as possible.
? Be careful of persons stand foring themselves as Nigerian or foreign authorities functionaries inquiring for your aid in puting big amounts of money in abroad bank histories.
? Do non believe the promise of big amounts of money for your cooperation.
? Guard your history information carefully. 2 3 4 5 15
3 ) LEGAL RULES RELATING TO MONOPOLIES, MERGERS AND ANTICOMPETETIVE PRACTICES USING ‘MICROSOFT ‘S BIG PATENT VERDICT OVERTURNED CASE IN 2009 ‘ :
§ 2 is non violated merely by holding a monopoly. § 2 is violated by a house merely when it acquires or maintains, or effort to make so by prosecuting in “exclusionary conduct” which is different from growing or development as a consequence of prosecuting in a superior merchandise, concern expertness, or other historical event.
After professing that Microsoft had monopoly powers, the District tribunal came to the decision that Microsoft had violated § 2 by prosecuting in a figure of “exclusionary acts” , with a position to forestalling the distribution and usage of similar merchandises which might endanger their ain monopoly. The District Court held Microsoft apt for:
( 1 ) The manner in which it integrated IE into Windows.
( 2 ) Its assorted traffics with Original Equipment Manufacturers ( “ OEMs ” ) , Internet Access Providers ( “ IAPs ” ) , Internet Content Providers ( “ ICPs ” ) , Independent Software Vendors ( “ ISVs ” ) , and Apple Computer.
( 3 ) Its attempts to incorporate and to overthrow Java technologies ; and
( 4 ) Its class of behavior as a whole. Upon entreaty, Microsoft argues that it did non prosecute in any exclusionary behavior.
It is non easy to do out whether an act is “exclusionary” or a consequence of vigorous competition because there are many Numberss of grounds for illegal exclusion. An antimonopoly tribunal is faced with the challenge to put down rules to separate “exclusionary acts” which may hold the consequence of cut downing societal public assistance, and competitory Acts of the Apostless, which may increase it.
From a century of instance jurisprudence on monopolisation under § 2, nevertheless, several rules do emerge.
First, to be condemned as exclusionary, a monopolizer ‘s act must hold an anticompetitive consequence. That is, it must harm the competitory procedure and thereby harm consumers. In contrast, injury to one or more rivals will non do.
Second, the complainant, on whom the load of cogent evidence of class remainders.
Third, if a complainant successfully establishes a Prima facie instance under § 2 by showing anticompetitive consequence, so the monopolizer may proffer a “ precompetitive justification ” for its behavior.
Fourth, if the monopolizer ‘s precompetitive justification bases unanswered, so the complainant must show that the anticompetitive injury of the behavior outweighs the pro- competitory benefit.
As the Fifth Circuit more late explained, “ [ I ] T is clear… that the analysis under subdivision 2 is similar to that under subdivision 1 irrespective whether the regulation of ground label is applied.
Finally, in decision, while seeking to find whether the monopolizer ‘s has harmed competition and has hence committed an act of “exclusionary” intent of § 2, our focal point should be on the consequence of that behavior and non on the motivation behind it. Evidence of the monopolizer ‘s motivation is relevant to understand the likely consequence of the monopolizer ‘s behavior. 6 7 8 9 10
4 ) KEY PROVISIONS RELATING TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES ON THE WORLDWIDE WEB:
Intellectual Property is defined as legal rights that result form rational activity. Intellectual activity may include any action from industrial, scientific, literary and artistic field. India Intellectual belongingss comes into 4 major pails ; Copy Right, Patent, Trademark and Design Protection.
( IPR ) Intellectual Property Rights of computing machine package is covered under the Copyright Law, which is protected under the proviso of Indian Copyright Act 1957. Major alterations came into consequence from 10 May 1995 to Indian Copyright Law, which made the Indian Copyright Law the toughest in the universe. This was the first clip ; the Copyright Law was clearly explained in India: The rights of a right of first publication holder Position on leases of package the rights of the user to do backup transcripts.
Most of the package is easy to copy, so the Copyright Act was needed. Harmonizing to subdivision 14 of the Act, it is illegal to do and administer transcripts of copyrighted package without the proper permission of the authorization. A Condemnable and Civil action can be organized for limitation, existent harm or legal amendss per breach. Heavy penalty and mulcts can besides be applied for misdemeanor of package right of first publication. Section 63 B orders a minimal jail term of 7 yearss, which can be extended up to 3 old ages.
SUMMARY OF INDIAN GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES TO PROTECT IPR:
Indian authorities began to take different stairss towards Intellectual Properties Rights Protection. The Government has taken figure of steps and strengthened the enforcement of Copyright Law. A sum-up of these steps is given below:
1. A Handbook of Copyright Law has brought out by the Government to make consciousness of right of first publication Torahs amongst professionals, members of the public etc. Handbooks are free of cost and have been distributed to the stat and cardinal authorities functionaries.
2. National Police Academy and National Academy of Customs and Narcotics developed several preparation plans on right of first publication Torahs for the constabulary and usage officers.
3. The Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India has begun taking several steps for beef uping the enforcement of right of first publications that include Copyright Enforcement Advisory Council ( CEAC ) . Separate cells have been created at Police Headquarters, organisations of seminar and workshops are to cerate greater consciousness of copyright Torahs among the enforcement forces and the general populace.
4. Particular cells have been set up in 23 provinces and brotherhood Districts for copyright enforcement. These provinces are Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Andaman & A ; Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Dadra & A ; Nagar Haveli, Daman & A ; Diu, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & A ; Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Orissa, Pondicherry, Punjab, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura and West Bengal.
5. The Government began to develop seminars/ workshops on right of first publication issues. These seminars include enforcement forces and representatives of industry organisations. Government started to take figure of steps and hence more activity has been found in the enforcement of right of first publication Torahs in the state.
BEST PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LOSS:
The undermentioned Best Practices will assist minimise the hazard of losing Intellectual Property in carry oning concern offshore:
1. Understand the Intellectual Property rights: To protect the Intellectual Property the first and first measure is to acquire a general thought of different program and Torahs by the seaward state.
2. Put up an Internal Intellectual Property protection squad: An Internal rational squad should be organized, whose duty is to protect ongoing concern and to supervise the Intellectual belongingss, misdemeanors etc.
3. Analyze the work entity that can be copyrighted/ patented: Analyze the work separately that can be copyrighted/ patented, and it is of import to do certain that such protection will be valid in the state of seaward activity/ development.
4. Offshore vendor history: Extreme cautiousness must be taken when company is come ining into a seller relationship with an seaward entity. Company must understand the seller ‘s history with regard to any Intellectual belongings misdemeanors.
5. Define IP misdemeanor clause: Specify a separate Intellectual Property Violation clause and the effects of Intellectual belongings misdemeanor, when subscribing a trade with the offshore seller. Some companies sign the trade with the onsite entity of the offshore seller, thin gives them more advantage to take any legal actions.
6. Seek a mention cheque for all the squad members: It is of import to look into the offshore squad and to seek the appropriate mention to do certain there is no IP misdemeanor instance history behind the person.
7. Pay Attention to utilize of unauthorised software/third party merchandises: Be careful of utilizing unauthorised package or 3rd party merchandises. Unlicensed package or merchandises should n’t be used by both onsite and the offshore squad.
8. Enforce Cardinal Depository: Enforce a cardinal storage country for all the codification and paperss can non merely better the overall efficiency, and will besides avoid legion proxies for critical paperss and codification.
9. Perform Periodic IP Audit: An audit should analyze any new work that can be copyrighted and take all unauthorised software/ merchandise and allot suited rights to the paperss and update any alterations to ownership to patents.
10. Enforce the usage of Mentions: Make sure to give appropriate mentions and credits to the proprietor of the work, this will raise the criterions of the employees to admit and esteem and protect other people ‘s work.
11. Develop Awareness: Protecting the Intellectual belongings can be greatly enhanced if all the employees of the company and the offshore squad are on the same page as to how much attending the company pays to protect Intellectual Properties.
Case Studies Related to Indian IPR Protection
In Bangalore constabularies arrested three package applied scientists for copying package from a company they were working for. The accused applied scientists had started a new company called Ample Wave Communication Network. They had illicitly copied the codification of the company ‘s package and were utilizing at their company. Police seized four computing machines, one waiter and one laptop from accused. ( beginning: DH News Service, Bangalore )
Intellectual Property Protection in India
Shekhar Verma a former Employee of Mumbai-based Geometric Software Solutions Company was accused of stealing $ 60 million worth of beginning codification of a package merchandise of Geometric Software ‘s US-based client, Solid Works and seeking to sell them to other companies for a luck. The American house has the sole rights over the package. ( Source Rediff.com )
Loss of rational belongings can do companies to lose their place in the market. Understanding the state ‘s IP rights and following the best patterns can cut down the hazard of fring the company ‘s Intellectual belongings. Committedness to protect the Intellectual belongings should be developed and look after in all organisations of a company. 11 12 13
1. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.cerp.org/Default.asp
2. Geraint Howells and Steve Weatherwill, Consumer Protection Law ( Markets and the jurisprudence ) , 2nd edition 2005, ISBN: 978-0754623380
3. Teri B. Clark, The Complete Personal Finance Handbook ; ISBN 13: 978-1601380470, published by Atlantic Publishing company
4. David Kelly, Business Law, 5th Edition, 2005, Cavendish Publishing, ISBN 13: 978-1859419625,
5. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail? type=RESOURCES & A ; itemId=1073792330
6. Denis Keenan, Smith & A ; Keenan ‘s Advanced Business Law. 11th Edition, 2000. ISBN 0 273 64601 Ten.
7. Geoffrey Morse, Charlesworth & A ; Morse Company Law, 16th Edition, 1999/
8. Dave Needham, Business for Higher Awards, 1995. ISBN 0 435 285343
9. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.bloomberg.com/apps/news? pid=newsarchive & A ; sid=ajwsdZdSECBw
10. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.newsrx.com
11. DH News Service, Bangalore
12. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.rediff.com/money/2002/aug/28cbi.htm
13. Birgitte Anderson, Intellectual Property Rights: Invention, Governance, And the Institutional Environment. ISBN: 978 – 1845422691
14. M. Pugatch and Meir Perez, The International Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights, 2004, Edward Elgar Publishing, ISBN: 978-1843767640
15. G.F. Woodroffe, Consumer Law & A ; Practice, 2007, ISBN: 978-0421959507