Answer:
The federal laws related to this issue protect only those electronic communications which are made in the course of transmission and therefore the court should grant summary judgment in the favour of company N. In this case, the e-mail was already sent and was stored in the computers of company N.
Retrieval of messages or e-mails after they have been transmitted is not covered by the federal laws in this case. These laws only provide protection for those messages which are in transmission stage. Since company N retrieved Mr F's mails after post transmission therefore it is not prohibited under Federal laws.
Company N is ethically incorrect in retrieving Mr F's mail from the file server because it would be considered as an invasion of Mr F's privacy which is similar to searching someone else's garbage. It could also be considered as violation of duty towards the employees even though Mr F was working as an independent contractor.
Answer:
Dissent interpreted that company M paid royalties only under protest and due to the compulsion of injunction decree. The dissent claimed that if company M had not done so and defied it then it would have had to face the risk of actual as well as treble damages in the infringement suit.
The court stated that in this case, the requirement of a controversy or case are met if the payment of claim is asked as of right and payment is made, but the coercive or involuntary nature of exaction preserves the right of recovering the sum paid or to challenge the claim's legality.
Court further stated that Article III does not require the petitioner to terminate its license agreement for seeking a declaratory judgment that the underlying patent is not valid or not infringed.
Answer:
Even if both the companies assert their positions only for profit then still it could be considered ethical if it results in greatest happiness for the greatest number of peoples i.e. the employees, shareholders and customers, under the Utilitarian ethical theory. This theory states any course of action which can maximise happiness and reduce suffering for the greatest number of peoples can be deemed as ethical.
In this case if both the companies are seeking profit for benefitting their customers, shareholders and employees then their actions would not be considered as unethical. However if both these companies just want to maximize their wealth and market position while ignoring the benefits of all others then their actions would be deemed as unethical.