Bus Ethics

1. What kind of paper is the National Enquirer?

The National Enquirer is a weekly magazine that contains exaggerated, and sometimes untrue, information about celebrities, often referred to as a tabloid.

2. Was it ethical for the National Enquirer to try to avoid suit in California?

No, I do not think it was ethical for the National Enquirer to avoid the suit in California. However, I would not expect anything else from this tabloid that has created a company around the idea of freedom of speech and not the value of ethics. They clearly are in violation of:

* Social Responsibility of Business—created to ensure corporations have social responsibility for their actions

* Moral minimum—Companies make a profit while avoiding harm to others

* Kantian Theory of Ethics-- “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”

3. Are the defendants subject to suit in California? Why or why not?

My opinion is yes, the defendants are subject to suit in California; legal reasoning of:

* Due Process: this clause gives jurisdiction over a defendant in any state with which the defendant has certain minimum contacts. Due to the high amount of circulation of the National Enquirer; I think this covers the certain minimum contacts.

* Long-Arm Statute: would be relevant because “transacted other business in the state that allegedly caused injury to another person.” This relevance may be supported with Calder’s contacts with the state of California. My guess would be the information was obtained from a person in this state who had contact with someone involved with the National Inquirer.

* Venue: This concept states that lawsuits should be heard by the court with jurisdiction that is nearest the location in which the incident occurred and where the parties reside. This concepts suggests that the suit of Calder v. Jones should be held in the state of California because it is where Shirley Jones resides and works; California is also the state with the...