The case involved Nike who was criticized for the labor conditions in its factories in China, Vietnam and Indonesia which included but were not limited to inadequate health and safety, lower minimum wage and sexual and physical abuse. These criticisms were done in newspapers,…
Kasky went on to say that this was a case of false advertising and that this clearly constituted commercial speech, this was important because the protection that is offered under the First Amendment offers protection to non commercial speech and does not in any way protect commercial speech. Nike’s response stated that the laws on false advertising did not cover the company’s expression of its views in respect of public issue and the fact that such views were clearly protected under the First Amendment as what had been said and done by Nike was non- commercial speech. The trial court agreed with the arguments of Nike and went on to say that such action was non-commercial speech and was therefore protected under the federal and state constitutions without leave to amend.
The Plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal which in turn acknowledged the findings of the trial court and stated the same things that is what was important was the fact that the alleged false and misleading statements by Nike were commercial or non-commercial. This was so because it would determine the protection that was offered by the First Amendment. The court went on to reiterate the fact that these were non commercial speech and so protection under constitutional free speech provisions was provided. Thus the Court of Appeal granted the plaintiff’s petition for review.
Thus the main issues that needed to be determined first were whether the speech that was made by Nike was commercial or non-commercial. This would be necessary because of the degree of protection provided as well as determination of false advertising.
In the current scenario it is clear that the requirement that a person making such a statement gives it as a commercial speaker is satisfied, this is because the persons who gave such statements were in business. Furthermore, the main reason for giving such a statement was to protect ...
Cite this document
(“Business Law - Nike v. Kasky Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/409621-business-law-nike-v-kasky
(Business Law - Nike V. Kasky Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words)
“Business Law - Nike V. Kasky Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/409621-business-law-nike-v-kasky.
Integrating Values - The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Nike Customer name Institution Integrating Values - The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Nike Introduction The importance of ethics and social responsibility in business has been the subject of debate since time immemorial.
Nike holds a strong and profitable market share across all markets, proof of which is that the American market leader Warren Buffet has .7% of his portfolio dedicated to the company which gives the stock the seal of trustworthiness.1 Nike has a stellar reputation for its products, with high quality and careful branding creating demand from the public.
Kasky alleged that Nike is guilty of making a false representation by issuing a statement that it is operating morally by providing good working conditions to its employees, negating allegations of mistreated and underpaid employees and hazardous factories.
Financial leader Warren Buffet has 0.7% of his portfolio dedicated to stock in Nike, Inc. (Warren, 2009), allowing the assumption that the stock is a trustworthy investment. While the reputation of Nike products is one of quality, with a branding the results in a coveted
These advancements particularly benefitted the way people conducted business and facilitated commerce. However, in the midst of the seeming limitless capabilities of businesses in this information and communications era, the world economy faltered and headed
First of all, STEEP analysis and porters five forces analysis has been done to analyze the external environment of the company. It has found that women fitness industry appears very attractive for the new and
upon the discovery of the insects, Downey and her daughter conducted Gordinier who has a license and remarkable experience in insect extermination. He inspected the premises and realized that there were bed bugs in each room. He pointed out the possibility that
The move to digital and social marketing aims to differentiate the global sports company from its competitors. Essentially, the shift is a notable shift from Nike’s traditional methods of advertisements such as television,
1 Pages(250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Business Law - Nike v. Kasky for FREE!