Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Threats Escalate: Corporate Information Technology Governance Under Fire, Lawrence J. Trautman
Threats Escalate: Corporate Information Technology Governance Under Fire, Lawrence J. Trautman
Lawrence J. Trautman Sr.
In a previous publication The Board’s Responsibility for Information Technology Governance, (with Kara Altenbaumer-Price) we examined: The IT Governance Institute’s Executive Summary and Framework for Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology 4.1 (COBIT®); reviewed the Weill and Ross Corporate and Key Asset Governance Framework; and observed “that in a survey of audit executives and board members, 58 percent believed that their corporate employees had little to no understanding of how to assess risk.” We further described the new SEC rules on risk management; Congressional action on cyber security; legal basis for director’s duties and responsibilities relative to IT governance; …
"Because That's Where The Money Is": A Theory Of Corporate Legal Compliance, William Bradford
"Because That's Where The Money Is": A Theory Of Corporate Legal Compliance, William Bradford
william bradford
Upon his capture in 1934, the legendary bank robber Willie Sutton was asked by FBI agents, Why do you rob banks, Willie? Sutton, who believed the question to be rhetorical, replied, dryly, Because that's where the money is. In other words, Sutton understood his interrogator to be inquiring as to why he robbed banks rather than, say, homes, or gas stations, or church offering plates. Had he understood the query as intended - i.e., what was it about Willie Sutton the impelled Willie Sutton to crime when many others, struggling to survive the Great Depression, were not? - Sutton could …
Preventive Detention In The Law Of Armed Conflict: Throwing Away The Key?, Diane Webber
Preventive Detention In The Law Of Armed Conflict: Throwing Away The Key?, Diane Webber
Diane Webber
More than ten years after 9/11, the “clear legal framework for handling alleged terrorists” promised by President Obama in 2009 is still undeveloped and “the country continues to hold suspects indefinitely, with no congressionally approved mechanism for regular judicial review.” Should terrorists be treated as criminals, involving traditional criminal law methods of detection, interrogation, arrest and trial? Or should they be treated as though they were involved in an armed conflict, which would involve detention and trial in accordance with a completely different set of rules and procedures? Neither model is a perfect fit to deal with twenty-first century terrorism. …