Paper Summary:

This paper explains the "Marc Kasky vs. Nike Inc", a claim brought against Nike, Inc. an athletic apparel manufacturer, by San Francisco resident, Mark Kasky, for misleading and false statements about its operations abroad. The author point out the main argument in this case is that the California Supreme Court states "companies making false statements about their operations are not protected by the first amendment free speech and are subjected to false advertising claims". The paper reports that, although the case ended in a settlement for $1.5 million dollars, it created a new set of standards, which organizations must follow in the way they communicate to consumers.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Commercial Speech and the First Amendment
Nike, Inc
Mark Kasky
Final Decision
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"Nike came under higher pressure when a spot audit by an accounting firm was leaked to the press of bad labor conditions in a large Vietnamese facility that contradicted Young's positive report. On April 20, 1998, a claim was filed accusing the company of false advertisement in the county of San Francisco. The charges were that the company had falsely advertised the working conditions of its manufacturers, which abused workers, had poor working conditions, low wages, and used child labor and that it lied about its operations overseas in order to increase sales of its products . In reaction Nike executed a series of immediate changes, such as, an increase in the minimum age, higher air quality standards (OSHA), and promised to permit independent inspections of factories. Even after implementing such changes, a lawsuit was brought against the company by Mark Kasky for "making misleading statements about its global labor practices," under California statute for false advertising."

Visitors who viewed this Essay also liked these:

• Business Plan # 22626 : "Nike, Inc."
• Essay # 71883 : "Nike, Inc."
• Analytical Essay # 113334 : "Nike, Inc."

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: