For the chessfield case study: identify broad implications of this case as you compare this case others scenario, and if you feel that this issue could be resolved by additional regulation

The proliferation of bittorrent and other file sharing media have threatened the copyright system. based on an understanding of incentives and opportunity cost, how are the decisions of musicians likely impacted?

Evan company reports net income of $232,000 each year and declares an annual cash dividend of $100,000. the company holds net assets of $2,130,000 on january 1, 2017. on that date, shalina purchases 40 percent of evan's outstanding common stock for $1,066,000, which gives it the ability to significantly influence evan. at the purchase date, the excess of shalina’s cost over its proportionate share of evan’s book value was assigned to goodwill. on december 31, 2019, what is the investment in evan company balance (equity method) in shalina’s financial records?

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court.the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center.because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.