BCOM 405- Communications Law and Ethics

Business Statutes Paper
There are a lot of different business rules which exist in a business environment. But, a far more exact view may dissect the subject into a much more particular business function known as interaction. The following paragraphs offer instances of a number of business rules found within the company interactions playing field as well as arena. The following paragraphs provide a number of instances of rules particular to the business interactions atmosphere together with an assessment of each, a present event concerning among the rules stated, and why that particular law is essential. Peoples-
Law (2008) stated “Statutes are rules made by legislatures. Most legislatures meet and make new rules at least one time a year” (para. 1). The definition of law will work as a precursor to the interaction part of the remaining paper.
Statutes with Analysis
CAN-
SPAM Act. “Fake email is unwanted email, generally having a commercial focus”
(Larson, 2003, para. 1). Since net use is constantly on the increase, electronic interaction also gets to be more popular as a consequence. The appearance of fake email turned into a requirement for latest improved rules supporting as well as implementing security against the annoyance. During 2003, the CAN-SPAM Act was approved as well as applied in an effort to prevent spammers as well as save the masses of the general public. Even though CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 has now been in effect for more than half a decade, the usefulness seems to be minimum. Much of the main reason might be directly related to the ever-increasing utilization of electronic interaction and also the inability to file suit because of such enhanced volume.
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
-The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) was suggested, as well as broadly acknowledged by many people, in an effort to control the behaviors of individuals taking action to recover bad debt (Larson, 2003). The reason for FDCPA is to control these kinds of collection attempts since the use of third parties, threats, continuous phone calls, use of profanity or obscenities, fake letters as

well as papers, and a lot more annoying situations linked with debt collectors.
Obviously, under the security and umbrella of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, a person has the ways and support to take the debt collectors to the court as well as prosecute within a year from the breach (Larson, 2004).
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Medical information has some of the most private as well as sensitive info known to man. HIPAA attempts to keep secrecy of medical info by describing and controlling the entry, sending, saving, and retrieving of the info present in patients ’ graphs as well as files. While there is a feeling of standard enforced under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act (HIPA), there is not an easy method of private security and a person can't prosecute or sue under HIPAA. Also, HIPAA has different coverage for electronic health records
(EHR) compared to coverage for personal health records (PHR) (Privacy Rights
Clearinghouse, 2003).
The Wire and Electronic Interactions Interception and Interception of Verbal
Interactions Act.
Electronic surveillance rules generally include what is known wiretapping. As per National Conference of State Legislature (2009), wiretapping is “any interception of a phone transmission by accessing the phone signal itself-and eavesdropping-listening in on chat wit h no approval from the parties” (NCSL, 2009).
But, a far more present addition to the Wire and Electronic Interactions Interception as well as Interception of Verbal Interactions Act incorporate a revision proclaiming that the electronic monitoring rules offer coverage of information interactions with the phone surveillance (NCSL, 2009, Electronic Surveillance Rules).
Business Statute and Regulation in Current Event
As stated in an earlier paragraph, the CAN-SPAM Act supports as well as safeguards those individuals impacted by spammers. But, exactly what the passage did not express is the fact that there are lots of conditions to the security of the CANSPAM Act. “A latest decision of the District Court of the Western District of Washington, Haselton v.

Qu icken Loans, Inc, (2010 WL 1180353, March 23, 2010) is helpful on this issue”
(Thompson, 2010, Standing under the CAN-SPAM Act).
Obviously, with the coverage of CAN-SPAM Act being restricted, Haselton finished up just winning an incomplete case. As per Thompson (2010), the Complainant did not have control over the hardware used in business as well as used third-party services to get net accessibility. One more verdict factor of Court was that Haselton’s statements claiming reduced system performance on the work computer. The Legal Court discovered that the lack of action to avoid Fake disregarded any leverage obtained in the original complaints. “As a consequence, the Court entered incomplete summary verdict for Accused on the issue of the CAN-SPAM Act due to this lack of standing”
(Thompson, 2010, para. 6).
The Importance of CAN-SPAM Act of 2003
The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 is significant for a company since the Act hold companies responsible for such mass types of electronic interaction. Even though Act is restricted in coverage, if the parties meet the criteria for coverage the security is welcomed as well as appreciated and may be rather satisfying. In exchange, the company may also be more respectable due to the steps taken to prevent or induce any ill ideas on behalf of the customers. Most businesses try to send optimistic messages and empowerment to the customer by giving a way to opt out of future messages, an email address for return messages, or even reveal messages of 3rd party approvals. Companies as well as customers alike may benefit significantly from the ethics which spur in the CAN-SPAM
Act of 2003.
Conclusion
Business interactions are ever-changing because the world advances into the electronic era. Messages are sent electronically more now than in the past. Therefore, legislatures trying to keep up with current situations as well as urgently trying to control business

interaction while developing into progressive innovation. As presented in the earlier paragraphs, an array of rules has been approved so as to provide security as well as coverage in the interaction function of business. In addition to that, an assessment of the article as well as present event gave way to great detail concerning the CAN-SPAM
Act of 2003. Being an exceptional illustration of business rules related to business interactions, the CAN-SPAM Act provides hope for future regulation as well as security against spammers.