• Assignment 3.1 - Commercial Speech (Team Assignment) This is a team exercise that requires research and collaborative writing. You are urged to use the Blackboard Collaborate Ultra feature. See Blackboard Help on the left menu for help with Collaborate Ultra. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ...." In general, we expect our government to let people speak and hear whatever they choose. The Founding Fathers believed democracy would work only if the members of the electorate were free to talk, argue, listen, and exchange viewpoints in any way they wanted. The First Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, protects commercial speech from unwarranted governmental regulation. BigBiz's shaving products division has developed a complete men's shaving system that offers razors, blades, creams and lotions in a single package, trademarked "All the Way!" Research has shown that strategically located billboards (either on or off the premises where the products would be sold) would be an effective means of advertising the product. Digital signs are more desirable than flat print boards. In addition, the company's marketing director wants to illustrate the billboards with a "ripped" man in "tighty whitey" undershorts shaving in the presence of an attractive woman wearing a sheer nightgown who fawns over the man. The suggested copy is "I'm going All the Way!" Would that content be legal in those three cities? If not illegal, what ethical issues might it raise? To prod your thinking on those content issues, view this 2009 video about "Calvin Klein's Racy New Ad" in New York City. Your team is charged with identifying opportunities to locate billboards in three key cities:

1. 1. San Francisco, California (Ninth Circuit Allows San Francisco's Billboard Ban to Stand)
   2. Memphis, Tennessee (Thomas v. Schroer et al, No. 2:2013cv02987 - Document 163 (W.D. Tenn. 2015))
   3. Austin, Texas, (Texas cities should upgrade billboard laws for digital age)

Location and content of billboards is regulated in each of these cities. Those regulations have been challenged in court with varying results. You and your team are tasked with determining which regulations you are subject to (refer to the linked cases) and, within legal requirements, to recommend the type and placement of the billboards. For example, what may the billboards say, where may they be located, are digital signs permitted? Select a team leader and assign tasks, then schedule communications to complete the assignment. First, establish that your billboard advertising concerns a lawful activity and is not misleading. Next, ask if the government has a substantial interest in regulating billboard advertising. Third, does the restriction directly advance this interest? And fourth, is the restriction narrowly tailored to meet its goal? The referenced articles and court decisions give you the answers to these legal questions. You then make recommendations based on your conclusions in each city. Your report should be in memorandum form, at least two single spaced pages and addressed to BigBiz's CEO, Harley Byke. See the Memos guide on the Purdue Online Writing Lab website for guidance (select Memos from the left menu). Be sure to look at the sample Memo. Your memo should reference the various laws and ethical principles that support your conclusions but it is not necessary to follow APA guidelines for references and citations. The memo must not only be clearly written and complete (grammar and spelling also count), it must also be persuasive. You want to convince Mr. Byke to accept your conclusions and follow your recommendations.

• Assignment 3.2 - Duty of Due Care The case of Kuehn vs. Pub Zone serves two purposes. First, how do we structure a law case? One format is known by the acronym FIDR: Facts, Issue, Decision and Reasoning. Our second lesson involves the duty of a business owner to protect its patrons from the criminal acts of third parties, where the business owner has no part in the crime itself. The McDonald's case establishes circumstances where the owner of a business may be directly liable for the injury caused to a patron. The Pub Zone case illustrates the liability of a business owner to a patron for the criminal acts of third parties on the owner's premises. Both cases turn on "duty" in the broadest sense. Am I obliged to furnish a safe product to my customer? What is my duty to protect an invitee who is injured on my premises? When do I have a duty of due care to protect someone invited into my business but who is assaulted off premises? As the manager of a convenience store (Biz 24/7) for the retail division of BigBiz LLC, you have encountered this situation . Applying what you have learned from the Hot Coffee case and the Pub Zone case, and the research you certainly will conduct, write a case summary of at least three single-spaced pages in FIDR format. You may decide in your favor or for Hank. Either way, you must explain the legal reasoning for your decision.
  • Facts: Recite the facts that are necessary to decide the case. Do not just paste the facts I have given you. Not all of them would figure into a decision on liability.
  • Issue: The question you must answer is whether you and BigBiz (the deep pocket) had a duty to protect Hank against violence of the boys. If so, did Hank assume the risk of injury or do anything to contribute to his injuries.
  • Decision: Did you have a duty to protect Hank from the boys' violence? Your answer is? He was/was not negligent, assumed/did not assume the risk.
  • Reasoning: Why you reached that decision. Begin with a set of guidelines concerning a business owner's duty. Whether a defendant has such a duty depends on the foreseeability and severity of the harm and whether the business person could have prevented it. Is a business owner an insurer of its patrons' safety? Not every assault on the business's premises results in the defendant's liability. When does the duty of care extend off the premises, if at all? Your decision should be consistent with earlier rulings (precedent), in this case Hot Coffee and Pub Zone are precedents, plus any other case on the point of off-premises liability you find in your research.

Having laid out the ground rules, describe the key facts from this case that you will use to decide whether you and BigBiz had a duty to Hank. Did you know the boys were dangerous? On what facts do you base your knowledge or lack of it? Were the acts of vandalism and rowdiness enough to foresee this kind of violence? The attack started on the adjacent lot; what facts would cause you to be liable for that? What is the significance of your not opening the door sooner? Did you have a duty to intervene? What more could you have done? Is Hank liable for his injuries? Why or why not?