Apple Lawsuit against Samsung

The value of Apple and Samsung smartphone and tablet market is estimated to be $200 billion. Apple is a dominant player in the smartphone market. However, Samsung has devised strategies which have enabled it acquire a significant share in the Smartphone and tablet market. This state of affairs has made Apple to experience a significant decline in its sales.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Apple Lawsuit against Samsung specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This is because Samsung is manufacturing products that have similar features and specifications with Apple’s products. It has incorporated distinct features in mobile phones which have made the company to emerge as the best mobile manufacture in the world. However, Samsung has found itself on the wrong side of the law after infringing various patents that belong to Apple. Apple made accusations against Samsung when it incorporated the iPad and iPhone technolog ies in its Smartphones and tablets. Samsung was therefore asked to pay Apple $2.5 billion for infringing its patents. On the other hand, Samsung also sued Apple for infringing on its patents and it asked Apple to pay it $399 million for patent infringement (Fitzsimmons , 2012). However, after a month of trial, the jury stipulated that Samsung had infringed Apple’s patents and it was supposed to pay $1.05 billion to Apple for the damages caused. This amount was dropped from $2 billion after the jury found inconsistencies in the ruling. The jury also rejected Samsung’s countersuit. Samsung was found guilty for various types of patent infringement on different products that Apple manufactured. For example, Samsung Epic 4G and Galaxy SIII were the biggest violators. In this case, Samsung was supposed to pay Apple $143 million for damages. Therefore, Samsung was accused of stealing Apple’s designs and technologies which made iPhones and iPads to be successful in the mobile phone industry (Lawler, 2012). Apple succeeded when the jury ruled that Apple’s patents were valid. However, Samsung thought that it would erode the claims that had been made by Apple. This is because Samsung thought that the jury would argue against stealing unique designs and technologies. The various technology patents that Samsung was accused of stealing include â€Å"pinch and zoom,† â€Å"bounce-back† and â€Å"tap and zoom†. Samsung also violated Apple’s Patents which covered iPhone and iPad designs. The jury ruled that Samsung knew the consequences of its actions. Samsung’s intentions of duplicating Apple’s designs and technologies were therefore clear. (Fitzsimmons, 2012). However, studies reveal that the manner in which Apple became successful from the ruling will have a crucial impact on the technology industry in future (Lawler, 2012).Advertising Looking for essay on intellectual property? Let's see if we can h elp you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More From the analysis therefore, it is evident that Samsung had violated Apple’s copyrights. As a result, the jury was right by making Samsung to pay for the damages that it caused to Apple. This kind of patent infringement is demoralizing. This is because it can make a company to become less creative for fear of losing its copyrights to competitors. A company that becomes victim to patent infringement can also incur huge losses. This is because its products would start losing value in the market. Moreover, copyright infringement can affect the attitude of consumers towards the company that infringes another company’s patents. Consumers can therefore decide to refrain from purchasing products from that company. It is therefore important for a company to be creative and find its own designs and technologies that can make it to emerge successful in the market. References Fitzsimmons , M. (2012). Samsung found gui lty of patent infringement, Apple awarded over $1 billion. Retrieved from https://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/samsung-found-guilty-of-patent-infringement-apple-awarded-over-1-billion-1093486 Lawler, R. (2012). Apple v. Samsung jury finds Apple’s patents valid, awards it nearly $1.05 billion in damages. Retrieved from http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/24/apple-v-samsung-decision/ This essay on Apple Lawsuit against Samsung was written and submitted by user N1c0M1n0ru to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

A Narrative History of the French Revolution

A Narrative History of the French Revolution Interested in the French Revolution? Read our 101 but want more? Then try this, a narrative history of the French Revolution designed to give you a firm grounding in the subject: its all the whats and whens. Its also a perfect platform for readers who want to go on and study the much debated whys. The French Revolution is the threshold between an early, proto modern Europe and the modern age, ushering in a change so huge and all encompassing that the continent was remade by the forces (and often the armies) unleashed. It was truly a pleasure to write this narrative, as the complex characters (how did Robespierre go from wanting the death penalty banned to the architect of rule by terror and mass execution), and the tragic events (including a declaration designed to save a monarchy which actually crippled it) unfold into a fascinating whole. History of the French Revolution Pre-Revolutionary FranceFrances history of piecemeal territorial expansion produced a jigsaw of different laws, rights and boundaries which some felt were ripe for reform. Society was also divided - by tradition - into three estates: the clergy, the nobility and everyone else. The Crisis of the 1780s and the Causes of the French RevolutionWhile historians still debate the precise long term causes of the revolution, all are in agreement that a financial crisis in the 1780s provided the short term trigger for revolution. The Estates General and the Revolution of 1789The French Revolution began when the third estate deputies of the Estates General declared themselves a National Assembly and verbally seized sovereignty from the King while the citizens of Paris rebelled against royal control and stormed the Bastille in search of arms. Recreating France 1789 – 91Having seized control of France, the deputies of the National Assembly began reforming the nation, scrapping rights and p rivileges and drawing up a new constitution. The Republican Revolution 1792In 1792 a second revolution took place, as Jacobins and sansculottes forced the Assembly to replace itself with a National Convention which abolished the monarchy, declared France a republic and in 1793 executed the king. Purges and Revolt 1793In 1793 tensions in the revolution finally exploded, especially in rural areas where conscription and laws against priests caused open and armed rebellion against the domination of the revolution by Parisians. The Terror 1793 – 94Faced with crises on all fronts, the Committee of Public Safety embarked on a bloody policy of terror, executing their enemies – real and imagined – with no real trials in an attempt to save the revolution. Over 16,000 were executed and over 10,000 died in prison. Thermidor 1794 - 95In 1794 Robespierre and the other terrorists were overthrown, leading to a backlash against his supporters and the laws they had en-acted. A new constitution was drawn up. The Directory, t he Consulate and the End of Revolution 1795 - 1802From 1795 to 1802 coups and military power played an increasing role in the rule of France, until an ambitious and highly successful young General called Napoleon Bonaparte seized power and had himself elected Consul for Life in 1802. He would later declare himself Emperor, and a debate about whether he ended the French Revolution would outlast him (and continue to this day). He certainly mastered the forces the revolution unleashed and tied together opposed forces. But France would search for stability for several decades yet. Related Reading on the French Revolution History of the GuillotineThe Guillotine is the classic physical symbol of the French Revolution, a machine designed for its cold blooded equality. This article takes a look at the history of both the guillotine and the similar machines which came before.

Creative book Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Creative book - Essay Example Leatherman tools give you the best service ever because our goods have fair prices, durability and the best ever guarantees at 25 years time. This is enough time to have become a macho man. Grab your today and take home a sexy lady. Appeal comes from the luxurious part of the tools and its handy nature of preparing juices with the compact juice tool. The best part is that all Leatherman tools are replaceable and have guides. Be the man with Leatherman tools. Try the lucky charm in Leatherman tools. Caught in danger? Have pocket survival tools: A simple tool can change your life. A simple tool can mean life and death. What if the tool was a multi dual with numerous tools all in one? This could mean fighting the worst battles and emerging victorious. This is what Leatherman tools aim at. Apart from folding in disparate ways, Leatherman tools come in different styles in one piece. There is combination of blades, pliers, files, pruners, screwdrivers with some sets having cork screws. All these are replaceable and have back up. Furthermore, Leatherman tools have manuals that make them easier to use. For more information visit our websites and comment or ask our dedicate staff for assistance whenever. Leather man tools the best offers ever. Here is a faster way of fixing your problems: With over thirty ranges of products, Leatherman hand tools are the most wanted hand tools in town. The company strives to give you the best by offering luxury, durability and value all in one. Everybody has a catch in the trendy hand tools and fixing problems is a walk in the park. Rush while stocks last but Leatherman will always offer you the most tiring guarantees in the market placing it at the top of the market. Our dedicated staffs have stylish hand tools that take the drabness off the use of hands to fix all problems. Camping, hitch hiking and home problems are now our best friends with the triple power of Leatherman hand tools. Don’t we just love have

Critically consider the challenges and opportunities that social and Essay - 1

Critically consider the challenges and opportunities that social and community enterprises face in their pursuit to affect social change - Essay Example Such new generation of entrepreneurs uses new approaches from the commercial world and employ new types of  technology  to embrace the greater amount of social  and  environmental  problems that occurred recently. Now enterprises are socially and environmentally oriented and it does not matter whether it is a for-profit or a non-profit organization, its entrepreneurial solutions propose more engagement, jobs and hope in those areas where until today there were none of such enterprises (Branson, 2013). There appeared entrepreneurs with social passion, whose creativity skills and entrepreneurial frame is deeply in mind, those who are ready to create and implement â€Å"something out of nothing† (Praszkier & Nowak, 2011). These individuals are the social entrepreneurs and these are their businesses, which have already created a phenomenon of social entrepreneurship in practice. Social entrepreneurs are aimed to address their activities to the unsolvable social problems and that is how these modern companies have earned a considerable success in motivating a people to generate a huge impact on the society (Defourny & Nyssens, 2010). By the time that social entrepreneurs became well known type of business makers, they have grown into a global movement earning the name of those who bring social- value creations to people and thus are appreciated by more and more people. However, due to the limited research in this sphere, there is no single opinion whether social entrepreneurs bring mainly good things to the society or whether their activities are underestimated (Short, Moss & Lumpkin, 2009). The following paper will try to analyze the challenges and opportunities that social enterprises face today and if it impacts social change. Due to many researches that were studied, there are several definitions of social entrepreneurship. One of such definitions claims that its aim is the ability of

Value & Risk Management Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4500 words

Value & Risk Management - Assignment Example Value drivers can be defined as elements within a project which improve the product quality, and also minimise costs. These drivers become essential during project management as they provide assistance to auditors on possible value adding elements. The utilisation of value drivers remains fundamental to successful completion of many development projects, within the construction industry. These elements remain fundamental towards ensuring projects remain within their allocated budgetary requirements, and produce satisfactory outcomes. Several value drivers can be identified for the project as defined below Ensure effective project management and delivery Achievement of required financial targets Minimising operation and maintenance costs, and environmental impact for the building Complying with various third party requirements Effective project management Effective project management process involves proper utilisation of available resources as a method of minimising wastage at differ ent project development stages. Effective management remains the most fundamental element for ensuring efficacy in development projects. This involves the proper utilisation of available resources in meeting the requirements of the project as defined in the planning stages. This value driver remains focused at ensuring projects achieves excellence through compliance with required project outcomes. Ensuring presence and application of this value driver remains fundamental to successful project completion. The incorporation of effective management begins with the appointment of a project team. In ensuring effectiveness, the management team should be selected from individuals possessing the essential skills and expertise in the construction industry. The utilisation of independent client advisors could be applied where the team lacks experts in a specified profession, While selecting individuals with essential expertise and skills, a consideration for cost should also be factored to en sure functionality of the team. The team must become fully engaged into the project from the beginning stages. Efficacy in the management skills of the team should be displayed through coordination, integration and communication among the team members, consequently ensuring the team functions as a single unit. Other than communication among team members, external communication with stakeholders remains a fundamental component for ensuring success in development projects. Management teams should involve users, contractors and all members involved in the supply chain delivery continuously, to get their expertise and opinions on the project. The management team should develop an execution plan, which should act as a guideline during the project lifetime. The effectiveness of the team remains the main reason behind utilising a project management team, fully engaged in the operations of the project. The effectiveness should be measured according to the desired industry standards, develop ed by regulatory organisations. Compliance to these regulatory requirements remains a key performance indicator

Police UK Force

Police UK Force Evaluating the Moral Justification of Force in the UK Police Consequentialism and the Use of Deadly Force Among Police Personnel in the UK Against a backdrop of a democratic society, the use of deadly force by the police in countries such as the UK seems implausible for human rights activists. First, police officers are expected to uphold the human rights of every individual hence, civilian rights are always preserved even in criminal cases where the due process of law is considered to be the golden standard in the judicial system. Thus, threading the line between regulations and policies of the agency as well as the ethical and moral dilemma in the use of deadly force predisposes police officers to question the legitimacy as well as the moral justifications in their use of deadly force. While several philosophical theorists have argued for different justifications through philosophical theories, the theory of consequentialism appears to be the one that closely justifies the use of deadly force among the police. Before examining the moral and ethical arguments for the use of deadly force using the consequentialist paradigm, let us first examine the important aspects of deadly force and the use of it by the UK police. First, deadly force as defined by Geller and Scott (23) pertains to the force reasonably capable of causing death or bodily harm. According to this definition, an act that can kill should be consumated before it can be considered as a deadly force hence; threats are not considered to be within the parameters of this scope. The use of deadly force according to Kappeler, Kraska and Marron (3) falls within emergency situations such as in hostage taking, shooting randomly, pursuance of a police officer of unarrested criminal and other similar incidences. Consequently, in the UK, police officers are given the discretion to determine if the suspect poses a threat to the police officer or the public. In the pursuit of these suspects, police officers are given the power to use deadly force through probably cause of harm. The courts decide whether the use of deadly force is justified or not and in some cases, police officers are charged because their use of deadly force is considered to be unjustifiable. Hence, there is a very thin line separating the justification of the use of deadly force from an act that is unjustified. The ethical and moral dilemma of police officers therefore rests not only on the regulations of their agency but on their analytical and ethical decision. Thus, the pursuit of the philosophical theory that can best justify the use of deadly force ensues. Consequentialism has been considered as one of the more important theories in justifying the use of deadly force by the police primarily because of its consideration of the consequences of a given act. In contrast with other theories that uses the nature of the act itself (deontology) or the goodness of the wrongness of the act or whether it is a good virtue or not (virtue ethics), consequentialism considers the aggregate value of the act based on the summation of its consequences- if it benefits the greater number of people, then it is considered to be morally justifiable. It should be noted that consequentialism has different forms such as the act consequentialism and the rule consequentialism. In this paper both types of consequentialism will be explored. The Ethico-Moral Principles of Consequentialism: Implications in Use of Force First, the use of deadly force is essential in policing and in providing a higher value for the consequences of the actions. Some writers do posit that the use of force is essential and central in policing. Skolnick and Fyfe, in their recent book on the topic, frankly contend: No matter how many warnings may be issued by superiors about limitations on the use of force, no matter how much talk about policing as a profession, police training continually reminds recruits that coercive power is a central feature of police life. (Skolnick and Fyfe, 95) They claim that such force will remain an inevitable component of policing.(Skolnick and Fyfe, 37) Vance McLaughlin similarly asserts that although the use of force by police is not as frequent as the public may imagine, police officers routinely use force to carry out their role as enforcers. His view is that the use of force is inherent in the profession just as legitimate force is an essential ingredient in maintaining an ordered society (McLaughlin, 1). Accordingly, in every nation today, law enforcement officers possess the right to use force (McLaughlin, 7) Lawrence Sherman maintains a comparable perspective in saying: Force is the essence of criminal justice, just as the monopoly on the legitimate use of force is the essence of the nation-state (Sherman, 37). Second, the use of force by the police is legitimized by the concept of the greater good for the greatest number- a concept that is used not only in democratic countries such as the UK but also in moral arguments. For instance, several studies both in domestic and international political and security arena have provided extensive justifications for the use of force using the consequentialist paradigm. For instance, in the study of Whitley (24), the author argued that preventive war to crimes produces more good than evil and hence, similar to the study of Yoo (730), the use of force is self-defense and in defense of society is a just war and is therefore legitimate. Hence, in the same vein, any person who is poised to commit a crime against the society necessarily invokes the right of governing institutions such as the police force to enforce security and safety of the greater good. Within this argument, the virtue of an act or the use of force by the police is justified by the preser vation of security within the society. This argument presupposes that the consequence of the use of force by the police would lead to greater security and hence, deterrence of violence which leads to better quality of life for the people in this case, British citizens. The use of force by the UK police was born out of threats to public safety. Neyroud (252-253) outlining the history of the UK police force has argued that the baton-days before the 1980s was inadequate in protecting the public against public criminals such as in the case of the Hungerford Shootings and the Thames Valley where an armed man started to shoot in random killing two person and one injury. Hence, according to Neyroud (253), the public expectations of the police and the use of force has been a dilemma for the UK police- is the use of deadly force justified? Accordingly, according to the Thames Valley Police (1) argued that it is justified because it protected not only the police officers but also the public. This kind of threat cannot be allowed in a society because it lessens the confidence of the people on the police as well as on their own neighborhood. Hence, shooting a person who is out to kill others by virtue of the consequence of killing innocent people and police of ficers is justified because the death of the criminal would mean sparing the lives of innocent people and in the process restoring the peace needed by the greater number of people. Third, the use of deadly force by the police is justified because of the framework of defending ones self and defending others within the society. Within this frame, Kaufman (24) argues that the morality of people is subjected to a higher authority- in this case, the police force represents the society to which social contract is established among its citizens. According to Gentili (16), regulations are always backed with force- this type of force whether deadly or not is legitimate because people who have committed crimes to others and the society ultimately obliterate their human rights. Hence, in violating the rights of others and the public, criminals who are subjected to the use of deadly force essentially, forego their own human rights. Hence, while even the UN Charter would consider the use of deadly force as the last resort, it recognizes that political and judicial means are not always responsive in defending its citizens thus, the inherent use of deadly force in self-defens e cases are permitted (Yoo, 738). Consequently, the use of deadly force is more prevalent in the United States than in the UK because of the reason of self-defense. The use of deadly force is mostly applied to cases considered to be of extreme nature such as the murder of police officers, firearm robberies and homicide of the general population (Parent, 230). Within the consequentialism paradigm, the consequence of self-defense is morally justifiable because the police use of force is within the boundaries of their discretion- it is easier for the society to accept the shooting of the criminal who is about to kill a police officer or an innocent bystander than the police officer or the bystander being killed by the offender (Levy, 28). Similarly, consequentialism justifies the use of force through the argument that its use can deter the incidence of crime for the greater good of society. For instance, consequentialism is an agent-neutral term (Huigens, 944) that judges an action based on the value of a decision. For instance, if a police officer shoots a hostage taker, the police officer is essentially choosing between the life of the innocent hostage and the hostage taker. In these cases, the decision is weighed based on the value of the decision for the persons involved and the society in general. The dilemma for the police officer therefore is whether to risk the life of the hostage victim or take action and shoot the hostage taker. While negotiations in this type of situations are first used, the use of deadly force is considered as an important last resort if all things fail. As long as the police officer had exhaustive other means, then, the use of deadly force does not violate the protocols of police power a nd regulations in UK policing. Fourth, the use of deadly force is not used in the consequentialist theory sparingly but rather on the grounds that the consequence is still the best alternative. For instance, Paul Ramsey (144), a thinker who often concentrates on war issues rather backhandedly mentions the police when illustrating just war principles. Ramsey argues that the just use of political violence in warfare must include two principal elements: 1) a specific justification for sometimes killing another human being; and 2) severe and specific restrictions upon anyone who is under the hard necessity of doing so. Both are exhibited, says Ramsey (144) in the use of force proper to the domestic police power. Accordingly, police officers distinguish between aggressor, victim, and bystanders; and though an officer may hit some innocent party accidentally, it would never be right for him or her to enlarge the target and deliberately, or directly, kill any number (Ramsey, 187). Ramsey grounds this justification of such limited use of force upon what he identifies as social charity, in which the Christian, or anyone else for that matter, is called to love the neighbor by protecting him or her from the other aggressive neighbor who has chosen to become an enemy. Although Christians are called to love the enemy as well, Ramsey asserts that when choice must be made between the perpetrator of injustice and the many victims of it, the latter may and should be preferredeven if effectively to do so would require the use of armed force against some evil power (Ramsey, 143) In this way, Ramsey maintains that restraint in the use of force is still necessary in order to respect and, indeed, love the alleged perpetrator. While this is the only point at which Ramsey devotes any attention to the context of law enforcement, it is noteworthy that it is a pivotal illustration upon which he bases the rest of his work concerning the justification of war. The use of force often reflects an on-the-spot decision made by the police officer on the scene. The officer must quickly assess the situation and take proper action. So many factors may come into play that guidelines, restrictions, and laws may seem too vague to be of practical use to the officer; the use of force is thus difficult to control.(Skolnick and Fyfe, 38) Yet, with more and more precision and uniformity, most recent guidelines and laws attempt to check excessive force and provide assistance to police by admonishing them that they should use no more force than is necessary or reasonable or that such force should be used only as a last resort. In this way, they echo the language of just war thinking, with its fundamental posture of restraint. The final criterion comes under the heading of right consequences in an objective sense, which is the goal or end that is sought. This is usually justified in terms of the global common good. It ordinarily consists in bringing about a lasting peace, and also includes consideration of the enemys real best interests. In the case of police, Malloy maintains that they may use the full force available to them only when they are convinced that the common good is being served (Malloy, 14). Therefore, the most objective goal of any officer in a physical confrontation is to have an opponent cease and desist from further resistance (McLaughlin, 85 ) The test of such a stance is taking someone as prisoner or, in other words, arresting him rather than using more force than is necessary. The best interests of all, including the alleged perpetrators, are to be kept in view, thereby maintaining the overall common good of society. The use of force should be used only with the greatest restraint and only after discussion, negotiation and persuasion have been found to be inappropriate or ineffective. While the use of force is occasionally unavoidable, every police officer will refrain from unnecessary infliction of pain or suffering and will never engage in cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment of any person. Hence, the use of deadly force as a last resort by the police involves due process or procedural integrity that qualifies both ad bellum and in bello criteria. On this criterion, sufficient time should be allowed for processes of negotiation and the exercise of diplomacy. Applying this notion to the police predicament, officers should exhaust all other possible methods for controlling a conflictive situation before resorting to the more severe levels of force.(Malloy, 13) Only when all else fails should a police officer resort to a higher degree of force. Admittedly, this is an onerous call for the police officer to make in a tense situation, such as a domestic conflict. Yet, this is precisely why there is a need for clearer principles and rules, as well as prior training to clarify and instill them. Implications on Act Consequentialism and Rule Consequentialism Consequentialism contends that an act is justified if the consequence is greater than the product if the deadly force has not been committed. Police officers who usually fall into the dilemma of using deadly force can use the philosophical ground of consequentialism as a rationale or justification for their decisions. However, police officers should be cautious in doing so. First, rule consequentialism necessitates that the police officer considers not only the consequence of the action but also the regulations of the UK police force. In doing so, it is important that police officers studies the protocols governing emergency situations where the discretion of police officers is called upon to decide whether the use of deadly force is necessary or not. Cases have it that there is a very thin line separating the legitimacy or the rightness and wrongness of a police officers decision to use deadly force. Hence, police officers would need to quickly appraise the situation vis a vis the regulations of the agency. On the other hand, act consequentialism would consider that the use of deadly force is justified only if it is morally right and if the act maximizes the good. Hence, it is important that the consequence of the action would yield greater good than harm to the personsl involved. An important philosophical discussion in this would be, on what perspective would the consequence be considered as maximized? The answer would be to the society. The society is considered as the barometer of the goodness or the wrongness of an act. Considering the greatest consequence would be to consider to the fate of the society. If for instance, a police officer shoots at a person who is shooting randomly, the police officer would be more or less justified in shooting down the person in order to save his self and the innocent citizens. Second, rule consequentialism considers the use of deadly force as the last resort in dealing with emergency cases. For instance, in hostage taking, the use of negotiations and diplomacies are considered to be the primary criteria among the police officers. The use of deadly force is only considered as a last resort or when all other means have been exhausted and failed. Police agency protocols also calls for the same prioritization. On the other hand, act utilitarianism would consider the maximal impact of the act. For instance, if the act had greater value for the society, then, it is considered to be good. Consequentialism would consider that police officers are capable of fulfilling the training and the analytic requirements in order to make a morally justifiable claim or decision would be explored in the next chapter. References Kaufman, Whitley. Whats Wrong with Preventive War? the Moral and Legal Basis for the Preventive Use of Force. Ethics and International Affairs. Volume 19: Issue 3. 23-30, 2005. Yoo, John. Using Force. University of Chicago Law Review 71 (Summer 2004), pp. 729-345. Neyroud, Peter. Use of Force. Policing. Volume 1, Issue 3: 252-254, 2007. Gentili, Alberto. De Jure Belli Libri Tres (1612), trans. John C. Rolfe (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933), bk. I, ch. XIV. Levy, S., The Educational Equivalence of Act and Rule Utilitarianism†, in Hooker, Mason, and Miller, (eds.), pp.   27-39, 2000. Parent, Rick. The Police Use of Deadly Force: International Comparisons. Volume 79, Issue 3: 230-237, 2006. Huigens, Kyron. The Dead End of Deterrence, and Beyond. Wlliam and Mary Law Review. Volume 41, Issue 3. 943-957, 2000. Geller, W.A., and M.S. Scott. Deadly Force: What We Know. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum, 1992. Kappeler, V.E., Kraska, P.B. and Marron, J.E. â€Å"Police Policing Themselves: The Processing of Excessive Force Complaints.† Paper, Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Boston, MA, March 1995. Ramsey, Paul. The Just War: Force and Political Responsibility 144 pages, 1968. Skolnick, J. and Fyfe, J. Above the Law: Police and Excessive Use of Force, 1993. McLaughlin, V. Police and the Use of Force: the Savannah Study, 1992. Sherman, L. Ethics in Criminal Justice Education, 1982. Malloy, E. The Ethics of Law Enforcement and Criminal Punishment, 1982.

education in France :: essays research papers

The education system in France: (source: European Union) I. Information on Community Law II. Information concerning the national education system III. Useful addresses I. Information on Community Law The fundamental principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality between students studying in a foreign country and national students applies as regards admission to an educational or training establishment. This includes enrolment fee requirements and the conditions governing the award of a grant to cover such fees. In this respect, any Community citizen must be treated in the same way as national citizens. One example of the kind of problem which young people studying another country may encounter would be special requirements on admission, the need to pass tests or supply documentary evidence, or other such conditions which are not required of nationals, and which have no objective justification. Each Member State's law provides for financial assistance for students in higher education. Some countries' laws may make it possible for a grant to be transferred where a student decides to study in another country. In other words, the student may continue to receive financial aid from his/her country of origin while studying in another Member State. Students covered by the Erasmus chapter of the Socrates programme are treated more favourably than students who have changed countries outside the Community scheme or under an inter-university agreement. It goes without saying that such students are still covered by the principle of equal treatment in terms of admission conditions, with exemption from the requirement to pay any enrolment fee. In addition, though, they continue to receive grants or other forms of financial assistance from their country of origin, regardless of the general rules or any obstacles in the country in question concerning the transferability of grants. As regards recognition of periods of training completed in an establishment in another country, the Community legislation governing the programme requires that this be provided for in the form of agreements between the university of origin and the host university. Such recognition is not necessarily guaranteed where study periods or training periods are not wi thin the scope of the Socrates/Erasmus programme. The conditions set out in a. above constitute a minimum set of rights which apply to all students who do not enjoy a broader status under Community law. For instance, where a student is classified as a worker or as a child of a Community worker, the principle of equal treatment applies to other aspects of academic life as well, i. education in France :: essays research papers The education system in France: (source: European Union) I. Information on Community Law II. Information concerning the national education system III. Useful addresses I. Information on Community Law The fundamental principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality between students studying in a foreign country and national students applies as regards admission to an educational or training establishment. This includes enrolment fee requirements and the conditions governing the award of a grant to cover such fees. In this respect, any Community citizen must be treated in the same way as national citizens. One example of the kind of problem which young people studying another country may encounter would be special requirements on admission, the need to pass tests or supply documentary evidence, or other such conditions which are not required of nationals, and which have no objective justification. Each Member State's law provides for financial assistance for students in higher education. Some countries' laws may make it possible for a grant to be transferred where a student decides to study in another country. In other words, the student may continue to receive financial aid from his/her country of origin while studying in another Member State. Students covered by the Erasmus chapter of the Socrates programme are treated more favourably than students who have changed countries outside the Community scheme or under an inter-university agreement. It goes without saying that such students are still covered by the principle of equal treatment in terms of admission conditions, with exemption from the requirement to pay any enrolment fee. In addition, though, they continue to receive grants or other forms of financial assistance from their country of origin, regardless of the general rules or any obstacles in the country in question concerning the transferability of grants. As regards recognition of periods of training completed in an establishment in another country, the Community legislation governing the programme requires that this be provided for in the form of agreements between the university of origin and the host university. Such recognition is not necessarily guaranteed where study periods or training periods are not wi thin the scope of the Socrates/Erasmus programme. The conditions set out in a. above constitute a minimum set of rights which apply to all students who do not enjoy a broader status under Community law. For instance, where a student is classified as a worker or as a child of a Community worker, the principle of equal treatment applies to other aspects of academic life as well, i.