Using the Module 2 text readings, course Web site links, the GCU library, the Internet

| September 8, 2016

1) Using the Module 2 text readings, course Web site links, the GCU library, the Internet, and/or other sources of literature as needed, complete the following problems:

a) Chap. 5 – “Problems and Problem Cases”, Problem 9 (p.167)

b) Chap. 6 – “Problems and Problem Cases”, Problem 14 (p. 204)

2) Responses should not typically exceed 200 words for each problem and should contain citations from relevant sources if applicable.

3) Complete the problems for each chapter first by stating the question(s) you are addressing, then by stating your responses. All problems and answers should be turned in on the same page/document.

4) Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the GCU APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

5) Submit the assignment to the instructor by the end of Module 2.

9. Explorica, Inc., was founded to compete with EF Cultural Travel, which dominated the market inglobal tours for high school students. Setting Explorica’stour prices lower than EF’s became an importantExplorica objective. EF’s tour prices were accessiblethrough the firm’s Web site, where the user whodesired information would enter various pricedeterminingfactors, such as desired date of departureand destination. The Web site would translate theuser’s preferences to a special code, decipherableonly by the site’s servers and human operators, andwould submit the code to the server. The serverwould determine travel options and prices suited tothe user’s specifications, and then send them to theuser’s computer. In view of the large number of possiblefactor combinations that a user might submit toEF, Explorica realized that manually obtaining priceinformation on every tour that EF could offer wouldbe nearly impossible. Explorica therefore wrote a“scraper” program, using code information providedby Explorica Vice President Phil Gormley, a formeremployee of EF. The scraper automatically submittedcodes representing all possible factor combinationsto EF’s server and then recorded the results in aspreadsheet. Explorica’s use of the scraper resulted ina compilation of 60,000 lines—the rough equivalentof eight telephone books—of data. Explorica used

this information to undercut EF’s prices. When EF learned of Explorica’s actions, EF sued Explorica,alleging civil violations of the Computer Fraud and

Abuse Act (CFAA). Section 1030(a)(4) of the CFAA is violated when a person “knowingly, and with intentto defraud, accesses a protected computer withoutauthorization, or exceeds authorized access, and bymeans of such conduct furthers the intended fraudand obtains anything of value.” EF sought a preliminaryinjunction that would bar further use of thescraper and would require the return of all materials

generated by the scraper. Was EF entitledpreliminary injunction?

14. R&J Associates leased certain commercial real estate from T&C Associates, Inc., for a one-year periodbeginning May 1. The lease required that T&C giveR&J 10 days’ notice before canceling the lease. R&Joperated the leased premises as a bar that featured

seminude dancers but discontinued the business during the following March when it lost a necessarydance permit. In late March and early April, T&Cnoticed that the bar was not open and learned thatR&J had lost its permit. R&J was behind on its rentat this time. Utility companies were seeking to shutoff service to the premises because R&J was also

behind on its utility bills. When T&C informed R&J that its monthly rent would be higher if it renewedthe lease, R&J said it had no interest in renewing.For the above reasons, T&C took possession of thepremises in April. T&C, however, did not give R&J

the 10 days’ notice referred to in the lease. T&C leased the premises to a new tenant later that month.At approximately the same time, R&J demanded thereturn of certain personal property items it had lefton the premises. T&C told R&J to contact the new

tenant, adding that there should be no problem with the return of the items of personal property. R&Jcontacted the new tenant, who told R&J to submit alist of its personal property because other partieswere also claiming rights to what had been left on

the premises. R&J did not submit this list and did not contact T&C again about the personal propertyitems. Later, R&J sued T&C for conversion of thepersonal property. Did R&J have a valid conversion claim?

Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELP
Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELPOrder Now