Bug Inc. Research Paper

BUG, Inc. Paper

Why Spy?

Ida Rhodes, LaTesha Jackson, & Brunetta McCroy

BUS/415

University of Phoenix- Milwaukee

Sheila M. Parrish-Spence, J.D.

Week 1

April 15, 2008

Why Spy?

BUG Inc. is a company based in the U.S. The company specializes in designing, manufacturing, and sales of surveillance equipment predominantly for law enforcement and other government organizations. In addition to providing services and products to the consumer there are numerous underlying legal issues that determine the standards and effectiveness of the company. The legal aspect spans from the civil issues with the consumer, to breach of contract with their employees and corporate liability of the company as a whole.

BUG, Inc. has vital product information that needs to be kept safe and protected from their competitors. By obtaining copyright, and patents for the company’s exclusive technology, and design information, theft would be reduced. Furthermore, company policy states any employee hired needs to sign a confidentiality and employee monitoring agreement. Having an agreement holds future and current employees accountable when information is leaked.

Many companies, such as BUG Inc. are custodians of information, which could prevent others from harm. The potential liability resulting from the use of a system by an unauthorized user, acting within a competitor’s organization, summarizes charges that Steve and his new employer WIRETAP may face as a result of their actions. Computer hacking is a criminal liability that is covered under both federal and state statues, which provide for civil liability as well. As a victim of computer hacking, BUG Inc. is entitled to sue both Steve and WIRETAP, in an effort to recover damages that the company may have faced. Included in the analysis of the civil liability, is the liability that stems from failure to protect sensitive information in one’s care, failure to prevent a system under one’s control from being used to facilitate tortuous or criminal conduct, and liability arising from the provision of security products and services to others.

Computers are an important means by which people communicate. Business parties often allow their systems to interact at a high level of trust. Unauthorized entrance into one of those systems puts the company at risk. In a case such as this one, the contract between BUG Inc and Steve provides that he is the one causing the injury. Even if the agreement does not address the issue, the company can still sue him for breach of contract, for failure to take reasonable steps to prevent the act from happening is a breach of the obligation to act in good faith, which is implied in every contract.

The problem with filing a civil suit against a hacker, in this case Steve, is that the breach of security may be undetectable making it almost impossible to identify him. The critical question for filing a civil suit against Steve pertains to the legal requirement of duty and whether or the courts will impose a duty to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information, further establishing the defendant/defendants. Once the duty has been established, the court must decide who is responsible for the injury.

Conversely speaking, penalties for WIRETAP may also be imposed for claims of copyright infringement, resulting from allowing an unauthorized person to use a system to store or distribute a company’s intellectual property.

Given the scenario provided,