The presenters wrote up their comments in the form of short essays which are collected together in this forum. The introductory piece by Jackson and Brammer challenges the conventional wisdom that irresponsible behaviour by corporations is associated with strong reputational penalties. In various ways, the Discussion Forum contributors explore why this link may be weak or highly contingent, focusing on dynamics at different levels of analysis. Karpoff identifies grey areas of firm behaviour characterized by market failures around both negative and positive externalities, and reviews evidence showing prospects and limits of reputation in this context.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at Howard Coble Chairman of the Subcommittee presiding. Cannon, Barney Frank, Howard L. Berman, Zoe Lofgren, William D. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. As you all know, we try to be timely here.
You all have gone through the effort to be here at Today we are going to be discussing electronic copyright policy.
I guess the lesson we would learn from this, folks, is that there are a good number of Americans who enjoy stealing. Thievery, larceny, fraud, piracy, call it what you will. It is in their blood, and even in some instances, even when they do not realize remuneration or gain from it.
Just the thrill of stealing. In fact, they enjoy it. They enjoy the thrill of it. So that is going to be the purport of our hearing today. We will hear testimony about electronic piracy of copyrighted works, a growing problem that startles individual and corporate creativity, thereby compromising the economic health of our country.
In addition to exploring the extent to which copyright infringement flourishes over the Internet, we hope to evaluate ongoing Executive Branch and private industry responses to electronic piracy. Along these lines, we will also examine a legislative proposal developed by our Subcommittee member, Bob Goodlatte of Virginia.
Regrettably, the problem has great potential to worsen. The advent of digital video discs and the development of new audio compression techniques, to cite two prominent examples, will only create additional incentive for copyright thieves to steal protected works.
While our hearing is not restricted to the merits ofI want to emphasize that this is not a forum to air complaints about other bills addressing extraneous issues that will be evaluated by the Subcommittee on other days. More specifically, I want all of our witnesses to understand that we are not here this morning to discuss the on-line service copyright liability of the WIPO Treaty Bill.
Now will be for another day, and we will indeed have hearings on that. The style of that case is LaMacchia. In LaMacchia, the defendant encouraged lawful purchases of copyrighted software and computer gauged to upload these works by a special password to an electronic bulletin board on the Internet.
The defendant then transferred the works to another electronic address and encouraged others with access to a second password to download the materials for personal use without authorization by or compensation to the copyright owners.
Let us not forget that small businesses still comprise that sector of our national economy which provides the most employment opportunities for American citizens. It deserves to be criminalized. In direct response to LaMacchia, the legislation specifically encompasses acts of reproduction or distribution that cover via transmission or computer theft.
In addition, financial gain is defined as receiving anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works.What could Bear Stearns have done differently to avoid this fate? In the early ’s? And during the summer of ?
And during the week of March 10, ?
CT: its ok, we’re not guided by what a private arrangement would be, there are important values at stake so this is ok (if the k was unreasonable for the amount of work done, or the number of hours was unreasonable, might have come out differently). (4) What could Bear Stearns have done differently to avoid this fate? In the early ’s? As an investment bank, Bear was just in pursuit of the return while underestimated the potential aftermath of being too risky. Most of its profit was . Some of these have been prominent in business, literary, professional and political circles, and have done much towards the development of the resources, moulding the character and establishing the institutions of our beloved state, and merit at our hands a more extended notice, but the large number who during the year have been laid to rest.
(1) Identify the major factors that contributed to Bear Stearns’s failure? Bear’s somewhat cutthroat and renegade culture of maverick may have contributed a lot to their failure. What could Bear have done differently to avoid its fate: during the summer of ?
- two hedge funds investing in ABS/CDOs internally managed. - October Everquest fund created. Archives and past articles from the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News, and vetconnexx.com What could Bear Stearns have done differently to avoid its fate?
In the early ’s There are several issues that can be highlighted that Bear Stearns may have completed differently to avoid their fate. The table below presents a comparison of total assets to equity by company; in addition, it presents the average of ratios of each company for the 10 year period.
The chart below the table presents a trend analysis and compares total assets to equity by year for Bear Stearns and the average of the five companies, including Bear Stearns. The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article vetconnexx.com further edits should be made to this page.