Introduction
Marketing, intellectual property, and product safety regulation are filled with ethical issues and potential dilemmas that all companies must deal with. PharmaCARE must also consider its actions regarding their use of U.S. copyright law for the drugs it makes, as well as its treatment of its workers. The company needs to decides if it wants to live up to its own brand, or simply go after profits.
The Ethics of Marketing, Intellectual Property, and Product Safety Regulation
Deceptive marketing is one of the most prominent moral dilemma that consumers and companies deal with when it comes to the field of marketing. Deceptive marketing includes examples such as a company not disclosing fees or surcharges, product labels that claim a product is something it is not (such as labeling a non-organic product ‘organic’), or claims about the benefits a product provides that are untrue. (Drake, 2011.)
A recent example of deceptive marketing has to do with a brand of yogurt from Dannon called Activia. The advertisements that were run had celebrity endorsements and claimed there was scientific proof that Activia was particularly nutritious and had special properties which regulated the digestive system. A lawsuit was filed because of these claims, and Dannon settled the case for $45 million dollars. (McMullen, 2010.)
An ethical issue related to intellectual property pertains to the copyright laws. Some would argue there are certain examples of copyrighted material that should actually be in the public domain. The song “Happy Birthday,” for instance, is currently protected by copyright, even though the song has been in use for over 100 years. The original creators of the song as no longer living, but Warner Music Group ...
... middle of paper ...
...6, 2010). Dannon to Pay $45M to Settle Yogurt Lawsuit. In ABC News. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/dannon-settles-lawsuit/story?id=9950269.
Weil, A. (August 21, 2009). Should You Get Your Drug Information From An Actor?. In The Huffington Post. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-weil-md/should-you-get-your-drug_b_265740.html.
Weiser, B. (June 13, 2013). Birthday Song’s Copyright Leads to a Lawsuit for the Ages. In The New York Times. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/nyregion/lawsuit-aims-to-strip-happy-birthday-to-you-of-its-copyright.html?smid=pl-share&_r=1&.
Wellner, C. (April 16, 2012). Lipstick or Diabetes? Cosmetics and BPA. In Care 2 Make a Difference. Retrieved December 19, 2013, from http://www.care2.com/causes/lipstick-or-diabetes-cosmetics-and-bpa.html.
Rationale This Further Oral Activity will be presented on a T.V. show format (based on the show “The Gruen Transfer”), with the host focusing on the false advertising of well-known health foods and drinks. This FOA will focus on the persuasive language and manipulative strategies used by businesses to influence and mislead consumers into believing false perceptions of their product, using case examples to support the evidence presented. The purpose of this FOA is to inform the audience on the plethora of manipulative and persuasive language used in advertising for ‘supposedly’ healthy products, while the target audience is Australian T.V. viewers 18-50 who are interested in the influence of advertising. The context of the piece is based on today’s world of marketing and how persuasive advertising strategies can influence Australian consumers.
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs, the marketing behind pills, and the use of media outlets.
Dr. John Abramson’s book Overdosed America debunks the myths about the excellence of American medicine. Abramson backs up this claim by closely examining research about medicine, closely examining the unpublished details submitted by drug manufacturers to the FDA, and discovering that the unpublished data does not coincide with the claims made about the safety and effectiveness of commonly used medicines. Abramsons purpose is to point out the flaws of the pharmaceutical industry in order to warn the readers about the credibility of the drugs they are buying. Given the critical yet technical language of the book, Abramson is writing to an audience that may include academic physicians as well as those who want to learn about the corruption of the pharmaceutical industry.
Patterson, Lyman Ray. "Statute of Anne: Copyright Misconstrued, The."Harv. J. on Legis. 3 (1965): 223.
One such misleading advertisement was for a product called Skinny Pill for Kids. This diet pill was targeting kids ranging from age 6 to 12. The pill was supposed to help kids lose weight and provide essential daily vitamins, minerals and herbs. “The marketer of the supplement said her company had not done safety tests on children” (CNN, 2002). It turned out that the product being advertised as a “miracle” to help children loose weight contained herbs that are diuretics. “Uva ursi, juniper berry, and buchu leaf all cause the body to lose water. A doctors’ guide to drugs and alternative remedies, states the uva ursi should not be given to children under age 12” (CNN, 2002).
3Walker, Hugh: Market Power and Price levels in the Ethical Drug Industry; Indiana University Press, 1971, P 25.
Over the past decade the societal view of creative society has greatly changed due to advances in computer technology and the Internet. In 1995, aware of the beginning of this change, two authors wrote articles in Wired Magazine expressing diametrically opposed views on how this technological change would take form, and how it would affect copyright law. In the article "The Emperor's Clothes Still Fit Just Fine" Lance Rose hypothesized that the criminal nature of copyright infringement would prevent it from developing into a socially acceptable practice. Thus, he wrote, we would not need to revise copyright law to prevent copyright infringement. In another article, Entitled "Intellectual Value", Esther Dyson presented a completely different view of the copyright issue. She based many her arguments on the belief that mainstream copyright infringement would proliferate in the following years, causing a radical revision of American ideas and laws towards intellectual property. What has happened since then? Who was right? This paper analyzes the situation then and now, with the knowledge that these trends are still in a state of transformation. As new software and hardware innovations make it easier to create, copy, alter, and disseminate original digital content, this discussion will be come even more critical.
To begin with, misleading advertising is the commercial speech “that can deceive consumers by ambiguity, through presentation or by omitting important information […] or including false information.” It is subject to federal regulation. Before 1895 fraudulent advertising was everywhere. It was not until 1893 to 1911 “when standards were in the making” due to the acknowledgement of ethical dilemmas of false advertising: deceiving the consumer and dishonesty.
Intellectual property abounds in our society, it is the direct result of the expression of an idea or other intangible material (Zuber, 2014). Our laws provide rights which are specific to the owner of the intellectual property. Furthermore, intellectual property is protected by laws just like tangible property is protected (Lau & Johnson, 2014). The most widely known forms of intellectual property rights include: trade secrets for confidential information, patents for a process/invention, copyrights for creative items and trademarks for brands (Lau & Johnson, 2014). While these rights may appear very defined, there are times when questions
It's time for a business ethics brush-up. Time to do a little soul-searching and kneeling at the business confessional. As always we're not concerned with the easy business choices e.g., envy, greed, sloth, coveting thy neighbors… The emphasis here is on the more subtle offenses that tend not to get much attention in either the Sunday pulpit or the pages of Forbes Magazine.
Music Copyright is a very important aspect of the music industry. The Copyright law was established to preserve the creativity and rights of authors, composers, performers of expression. Copyright is the law that protects the property rights of the creator of an original work in a fixed tangible medium. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copyright) A fixed tangible medium is something substantial like copying lyrics on paper or putting a song on tape or CD. Copyright can be seen every where in the music industry. Many music artist of our culture today have been involved in copyright issues. Recently, on MTV news it was stated that, "As the music industry becomes increasingly concerned about protecting the integrity of artists copyrights in the age of MP3. Prince has now filed a motion in New York federal court aimed at shutting down several websites offering free downloads of the Artist's songs." (http://www.mtv.com…19990304/prince.jhtml) In addition, in recent music news, "Nine Inch Nails lead man Trent Reznor copyright infringement suit was dismissed. Another artist claimed that the Reznor had stolen material for his last album." (http://www.mtv.com…19991202/nine_inch_nails.jhtml) The copyright law has become an important legal aspect to know our music generation.
In this day and age companies have mastered the technique of misleading customers by fabricating false claims about a green product or service that they swear to provide. This insincere display of information is called ‘Greenwashing’, a spin-off of ‘Whitewashing’. Greenwashing could be said to be a global phenomenon and it’s commonly seen in advertisements, on products packing, websites, emails, speeches, and videos (just to name a few). Greenwashing is a thought out process, a planned and typically well designed campaign. There is a wide range of reasons why companies are eager to partake in greenwashing; divert attention for regulatory change, to persuade critics or consumers, expand the company's market, and to make the company seem appealing. The goal of this paper is to provide three examples of ‘greenwashing’ and to relate these examples to Downing et al. concepts.
Introduction In order to generate sales, marketers often promote aggressively and uniquely, unfortunately, not all marketing advertisements are done ethically. Companies around the globe spend billions of dollars to promote new products and services and advertising is one of the key tools to communicate with consumers. Conversely, some methods that marketers use to produce advertisements and to generate sales is deceptive and unethical. Ethical issues concern in marketing has always been noted in marketing practice.
1 False advertising is the act of drawing openly regard for an item or a private company for expanding deals. There is something else which is called false promoting. False promoting makes misdirecting data to the customers who is expending the item because of the ad that draws in them towards the item. In any case, they don't have the foggiest idea about the way that they are being swindled in purchasing the item. This is morally off-base. Now and then organizations confer this duping to acquire more benefit. Because of this tricking customer fall into a trap. To some expansive degree organizations can run numerous sorts of notices that are deluding and manipulative. The organization which for the most part does false promoting is tobacco organizations. They are the greatest
Copyright is a protection for authors, composers or artists and other creators who create innovative idea base work. Copyright law is important because of its role to protect the interests of the creator, while allowing others to gain access to it legally. It designed to make sure that creators receive appropriate rights for their own ideas and creativity, and to promote artistic creativity by protecting the creator.