Please respond to the below:

1. What Does Morality Have to Do With It?

Many contracts, particularly those in the sports and entertainment industry, contain something know as a "morals clause." The morals clauses allows one party to unilaterally terminate the agreement if the individual engages in conduct that could have some sort of negative impact upon the other, usually a company or organization. These contract provisions, for example, are used to terminate an agreement when one party's conduct is detrimental to other's image or because that conduct devalues the party's performance. These provisions act as a means of discharging a party's obligation to perform under a contract. Tiger Woods, for example, had a number of contracts for endorsement deals with various companies. After a scandal regarding his behavior came to light, however, many companies unilaterally terminated their agreements with him, citing their morals clause, and claiming that Woods' bad behavior had made him less valuable to them as a product endorser and reflected negatively on their company. These clauses though have had a long history and they have also been used by studios during the McCarthy era to fire writers and other talent accused of being Communists. What do you think about such clauses? Should they be permitted? Why or why not? If so, what sorts of things do you believe should be the proper subject of such clauses.

2.The Statute of Frauds

The statute of frauds require that some contracts be memorialized in a "writing." Do you think that more contracts should have to be in writing to be enforceable? If so, what types of contracts do you believe should also require a written agreement? Do you think that it is unfair to refuse to enforce an agreement just because it was not in writing if the statute of frauds required it to be so? Do you think that electronic signatures made during an internet transaction should be given the same legal effect as though you were signing a document in person? Why or why not? What do you think about such clauses? Do you think they are fair? Do you think they should be included in contracts? Why? And, if they are, whose morality controls? What if a studio wanted to terminate their movie contract with Tom Cruise, for example, because the Church of Scientology was getting some negative press in recent days. Doesn't a company assume the risk that their talent may behave badly or may behave in a way that will be viewed negatively by some? Thoughts?