This point tell about the tragedy of World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, that result much people had lost their family, their home, business even make some people face trauma. For this disaster the public donated about $543 million. The Red Cross indicated it would use not necessary all of it would go to victims but use to support infrastructure. It is make a president of Red Cross choice to resigned and giving up her $415010 annual salary and position. The American public was outranged and demanded that the fund go to the victims. Finally, the red cross relented, at mitted an error in judgment, an a greed in tended use of the funds.
The act of The Red Cross President is ethic, he care another people and choice to resigned for the decision was made before. Actually The all party of Red Cross must to think about society, not jus about infrastructure.
Stanford University And Government Overhead Payments
In United States the government has a policy to building capacities of universities. The government grants to universities are indirect cost payments designed to compensate for the researchers use of the schools’ facilities. Stanford university received approximately $240 million in federal research funds annually.
But there is problem when an audit of Stanford research program by U.S Navy accountant Paul Biddle revealed that the bill to government is related to president Stanford interest. The School billed the government $3000 for a cedar –lined closet in president Donald Kennedy’s home, $2000 for flowers, $2500 for refurbishing a grand piano, $7000 bed sheets and table lines, $4000 for reception for trustees following Kennedy’s wedding, $184000 for depreciation for seventy-two-foot yacht as part the indirect costs for federally funded research. It means the fund is not entirety channeled to build university facilities.
From this problem, arise a few statement as the funding crisis evolved. Two among other things shall be as follows :
First, we will be reexamining our policies in an effort to avoid any confusion that might result. Moreover. Stanford routinely charges the government less than our full indirectcost precisely to allow for errors and disallowances ( from university statement ).
Second, we certainly ought to prune anything that is not allowable. There is not any question about that, but we were extending that examination to things that ( from an interview with Stanford daily).
However by July 1991, Kennedy announced his resignation, effective august 1992. Ultimately Stanford settled with the federal government for 1,3 million. The federal government also conclude that there was not fraud by Stanford.
The conduct of Stanford president Is not ethic. Actually , Kennedy has responsible and must to used, and channeled it really as researches of school facilities, not to self interest.
This issue about the use of lead paint by toys manufactured that do by some countries. In United States lead paint can notbe used on toys. American-made toys are capitalizing on the moment, touting their lead-free and quality manufacturing processes.
For the manufacture of 70-80% of all toys sold in the United States are responsible by Chinese. In fact, toys manufacture in Chinese, like Mattel use high lead content that resulted from the paint used on toys. And as the result a division of Mattel , had to recall 83 million toys. The recall is the largest since 2000 when Fisher Price recalled2,5 million baby swings because babies were falling out of the swings.
Actually,the lead-paint is used for infrastructure such as bridges and buildings. But in Chinese is use for the toys. The reason is the use of lead paint means 30% cost in paint supplies for a toy manufacturer in China. One Chinese plant executive said, “it depends on the client’s requirement. If the prices they offer make it impossible to use lead-free paint, we will tell them that we might have to used leaded paint. If they agree, we will use lead paint.
Finally, for this case the head of the consumer product safety agency, along with CEO Robert Eckert of Mattel apologized for Mattel failure to monitor its suppliers and indicated that Mattel had to earn back the trust of consumers. I just hopefully, they really can repair their system to produce the toys.
The act of that toy manufacture very, very bad. There are national standards on the use of lead paint in China, but no one follows them. It means they ( toys manufacturer) had break the law. Even the use of this lead paint on toy is can danger child. Toys manufacture don’t care about customers safety, also environmentally friendly. The only care to maximize their bonus and profit. We know China produces 80% of the world toys, it is clear how danger is for child in the world. There must be the conduct of federal law to control it, and resolved it with penalization or fine.
The Little Intermittent Windshield Wiper And Its Little Inventor
The core of this point tell about the infringement of a patent. The owners is Robert W. Kearns, a Maryland inventor and former engineering professor at Wayne State University, Michigan. He obtained a patent for his first intermittent car windshield wiper system in 1967.
The idea of this invention, was get when he open a champagne bottle on his wedding, and the cork virtually blinding him in his right eye. From this situation, he thinking how difficult it is to drive in a drizzling rain. Kearns’s mussing led to basement invention, a Windshield Wiper that automatically blinks on and off in light rain.
This invention at first, he installed in Ford Galaxie, but Ford installed it under its own patent for such a system. Then the infringement of the Robert invention, continually do by Major U.S car, and Japanese Automakers. He received no money for the use of these system. Kearns filed suit against Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, Toyota, and many else automakers. He had planned to open his own firm to supply the intermittent Windshield Wiper system to all automakers but was unable to do so after the companies manufactured the system in-house.
Dr. Kearns represented himself in the cases that ran trough 1995 until final resolution or settlement. He bring this cases to the federal courthouse. He is non-stopped to fight its right to get justice. He was representedby four law firms during the course of all the litigation, and spend much money for this. Finally Kearns settled his case with Ford motor for $10,2 million and the amount Kearns received from Chrysler, $18,7 million, was far less than he had requested as damages.
The infringement of a patent was do by car companies, it is clear unethical. This is against the law. We know a patent is create to keep its inventor from all plagiarist. The new thing (invention) it is not easy to create. It is need process, much of time, even cost. plagiarizing will only harm all inventor. But we have to know, the term of a patent is limited in order the innovation create by continuing. Else important we have to know, we must to fight for our right, and justice, don’t fear with the party that has a large status.
