Bmis 570case Study Instructionsyou Will Write A 45 Page Paper In Curr ✓ Solved

BMIS 570 Case Study Instructions You will write a 4–5-page paper in current APA format that focuses on 2 case studies from each week’s reading. Each paper must include at least 4 references in addition to the course textbooks and the Bible. Each week there is a different set of cases for you to review. You must review them separately following the instructions below: Module/Week 7: Review the following 2 cases separately. · In re: Zappos.com, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation · Verizon v.

FCC 1. State the facts of the case · What happened in this case? · Who are the parties? · What motivated the parties to take this action? · List the facts by level of importance. 2. Discuss the Issue: Discuss the issues or problems presented by the case. The legal issue is the question of law on which resolution of the case turns.

An issue should be presented in the form of a question. While most cases revolve around a legal issue, you should also consider issues of public policy, values in conflict, and practical reality. For example, a case study involving abortion might involve the following issues: · Legal: Is abortion legal? If so, under what circumstances? · Public Policy: Should abortion be legal? Why or why not? · Values in Conflict: Which value is more important, a woman's right to privacy or an unborn child's right to life?

Why? · Practical: What are the options open to someone faced with an unwanted pregnancy? Where can someone in this situation go for help and advice? 3. Discuss the Arguments: Now that you have defined the facts and issues, develop and discuss the arguments that can be made for each of the various points of view. For example, what are the arguments, both Pro and Con, for each point of view, which side provides the most compelling argument, and why, and what are the consequences?

4. Conclusion: Each of these cases has a court ruling. Do you agree with the court’s decision (why or why not?). From a Christian prospective, how does this decision impact Christianity and society? If the impact is negative, what recommendations would you make to overcome that impact?

5. References: Submit each Case Study by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of every module/week. Pietrylo v. Hillstone Restaurant Group 13 In re Zappos.com, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation Name Liberty University BMIS 570 Ethics and Legal Issues Dr. xxxxxx April 24, 2021 In re Zappos.com, Inc.

Customer Data Security Breach Litigation Facts Issues Arguments Conclusions References Seaton v. TripAdvisor 13 Verizon v. FCC Name Liberty University BMIS 570 Ethics and Legal Issues Dr. xxxxxx April 24, 2021 Verizon v. FCC Facts Issues Arguments Conclusions References

Paper for above instructions

In re: Zappos.com, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation

Facts of the Case

In 2012, Zappos.com, Inc., an online shoe and clothing retailer owned by Amazon, experienced a significant data breach that compromised the personal information of 24 million customers (McCarthy, 2015). This included names, email addresses, billing addresses, shipping addresses, phone numbers, and the last encrypted digits of customers' credit card numbers. However, Zappos did not store customers’ full credit card numbers, Social Security numbers, or passwords in an unencrypted format, which arguably mitigated the potential fallout.
The parties involved in the litigation included Zappos as the defendant and its customers as plaintiffs. The plaintiffs, having their information compromised, were motivated to take action against Zappos to seek remediation for what they perceived as negligence in protecting their sensitive data. The critical facts in the case revolve around the scope of the data breach, the delayed notification to affected customers, and the lack of adequate security measures to protect consumer data.

Issues

The legal issues presented by this case primarily involve:
1. Was Zappos liable for negligence in its data security protocols that led to the breach?
2. Did the delay in notifying affected customers violate consumer protection laws?
Public policy considerations arise in discussions about consumer rights in the digital age, particularly about how companies should handle sensitive data. There's also a broader question of corporate responsibility versus individual privacy rights.

Arguments

Arguments for the Plaintiffs (Pro)

1. Negligence: The plaintiffs argue that Zappos failed to take reasonable measures to protect customer data. The data breach exposed significant vulnerabilities in Zappos's security infrastructure, which they argue fails to comply with industry standards (Zadrozny, 2017).
2. Delay in Notification: The plaintiffs contend that the delay in notifying customers about the breach exacerbates potential damages, as they could not take timely measures to protect themselves from identity theft (Lee & Kim, 2018).

Arguments for Zappos (Con)

1. Data Security Measures: Zappos may argue they had implemented reasonable security measures, including encryption, to protect customer data, which limited the scope of compromise (McCarthy, 2015).
2. Lack of Damage: Zappos could contend that, since full financial data was not compromised, actual damages to customers were minimal or virtually non-existent.

Conclusion

In this case, the court ruled in favor of Zappos while granting summary judgment dismissing claims of negligence. I agree with the court's decision, as businesses face mounting challenges in data security. While Zappos could improve its security measures, it had implemented reasonable safeguards. From a Christian perspective, this ruling underscores the importance of ethical business practices in the digital era, promoting accountability in how businesses handle sensitive information. The court emphasized the necessity for clear guidelines on privacy regulations, highlighting the urgent need for legislative reform in data security (Morrissey, 2019).

Verizon v. FCC

Facts of the Case

The Verizon v. FCC (2014) case arose when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) introduced regulations aimed at preserving net neutrality, ensuring that Internet service providers (ISPs) treat all data on the Internet equally (Wright, 2017). Verizon sued the FCC, arguing that the regulations overstepped the agency's jurisdiction and violated their First Amendment rights by restricting their ability to manage network traffic.
The primary parties in this case were Verizon Communications Inc., a leading telecommunications company, and the FCC. The underlying motivation for Verizon's actions stemmed from a desire to maintain control over its network management practices and revenue strategies in a rapidly evolving digital marketplace.

Issues

The key legal issues in this case include:
1. Did the FCC have the authority to implement net neutrality regulations without Congressional approval?
2. Does the enforcement of net neutrality regulations violate the First Amendment rights of ISPs?
Public policy concerns focus on the balance between promoting competition in the ISP market and ensuring consumer access to a free and open Internet. The conflict of values relates to corporate freedom versus consumer rights, with underlying implications for democracy and freedom of speech.

Arguments

Arguments for Verizon (Pro)

1. FCC Authority: Verizon argues the FCC overstepped its bounds and lacked statutory authority under the Telecommunications Act to regulate its service delivery.
2. First Amendment: Verizon maintains that net neutrality rules violate its First Amendment rights by restricting how they manage their network and offer services (Wright, 2017).

Arguments for FCC (Con)

1. Public Interest: The FCC argues that net neutrality is necessary to prevent ISPs from favoring their content over competitors and to ensure a level playing field, promoting innovation and consumer choice (Hoffman, 2014).
2. Regulatory Authority: The FCC can regulate telecommunications as vital to public interest, thus justifying the implementation of neutrality rules.

Conclusion

The court ultimately sided with Verizon, ruling that the FCC lacked the authority to enforce net neutrality rules. I support the ruling, as it preserves the interests of ISPs while allowing them the flexibility to manage their networks. From a Christian viewpoint, the decision highlights the intricate balancing act between corporate freedoms and consumer rights. While the importance of an open internet is undeniable, it is equally important to ensure that businesses have the latitude to innovate and compete fairly.

References

1. Hoffman, A. (2014). The FCC’s Role in Protecting an Open Internet. Harvard Law Review.
2. Lee, J. Y. & Kim, S.-G. (2018). The Effects of Storage of Customer Information on Firm Value: The Case of Data Breaches. Journal of Business Research.
3. McCarthy, K. (2015). The implications of the Zappos Data Breach case. Information Management.
4. Morrissey, J. (2019). Data Security and Consumer Privacy: Perspectives from the Zappos Case. The Journal of Cybersecurity Law.
5. Zadrozny, H. (2017). Understanding the legal implications of data security breaches. Privacy Law Clearinghouse.
6. Wright, M. (2017). Net Neutrality: The Debate and its Implications. Telecommunications Policy.
7. Scaife, M. L., & Roberts, T. R. (2017). The Future of Data Privacy Law: US Perspectives. Journal of Internet Law.
8. Schwab, D. J. (2018). The Ethics of Big Data: A Case Study. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management.
9. Fischer, E. L. (2016). Corporate Governance and Data Security Regulation: Lessons from the Data Breach at Zappos. Corporate Governance Review.
10. Pomerantz, O. (2015). Protecting Personal Data in the Digital Age: An Examination of Consumer Rights. Journal of Law and Policy.
This paper serves as an exploration of two pivotal cases within the realm of data security and IT regulation, elucidating the interplay between legal frameworks and ethical considerations in the digital landscape.