The Tell-Tale Heart by Edgar Allan Poe - Essay Example

The protagonist is sane owing to his awareness of the day’s on-goings besides being able to narrate how he successfully unleashed murder with a lot of keenness. For instance, to prove his sanity he says, “Hearken! And observe how healthily -- how calmly I can tell you the whole story” (Allan 1). He goes ahead and manages to narrate chronologically all the week’s activities until the last day when he murdered the old man. The evidence of man’s sanity is also evident in the way he successfully concealed murder though eventually, nervousness betrayed him, which he had revealed to the reader at the onset of the account (Allan 1). He said, “TRUE! Nervous very, very dreadfully nervous I had been and am; but why will you say that I am mad?”  (Allan 1).

            Despite the persona claiming to be sane, his action of murdering the innocent old man is peculiar. Since a sane person guided by both moral and natural law cannot dare to kill without being provoked by either anger or enmity towards the victim. It is also inconceivable how the persona kept on going to the old man’s house during the night and failed to carry out his mission initially. This is insanity because the murderer does not know his mission while in the old man’s house because he would have killed him before. His argument concerning how he managed to coax the police probably is due to his character, which he might have developed before the onset of his insanity. In addition, the thought of dismembering the old man and burying him in the house proves his insanity (Allan 4). Since a sane person would have opted to bury the corpse far from the crime scene.

Democracy

            Democracy is a form of regime where entitled citizens despite their varying identities have a say regarding all the matters touching their lives (Sørensen 10). This is via contributing during policymaking or in other forums whose core purpose entails devising laws that will govern them and ensure harmony (Ampikaipakan). These laws act as tools meant for regulating affairs of any given state or association of people with an intention of reducing power excesses that may tend to elevate some citizens and degrade others (Christiano 85). It also entails ensuring those in authority put there by the majority be accountable for their actions and deliver as necessitated without any segregation (Solon 11). According to Solon, this is only achievable through encouraging or mobilizing the public to vote at all levels with an intention of coming up with a collective decision (Solon 11). Hence, shun the possibility of a few tyrannies that might take advantage of the citizens’ ignorance or lack of involvement and impose their autocratic statutes (Solon 11).

            However, numerous scholars have emerged with differing arguments regarding democracy and its quality (Altman 38). For instance, Atman in his study argues that democracy is not including or consider the preferences of each person while devising policies but grounding them as necessitated (Altman 39). Since grounding or ensuring real actualization is what determines both democracy’s quality and type in a state where diverse people inhabit. This is via promoting equality and protection of each person's privileges, which is beyond the “mere cosmetic” of casting a vote (McGann 89). Since voting cannot be a gauging tool meant to gauge a state’s democracy if those in authority cannot implement them as per the law (Patterson 9).

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. v. Rolfe Christopher. 431 F.2d 1012; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8091; 167 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1; 167 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1; 166 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 421. United States Court of Appeals for The Fifth Circuit. 1970.

• Is it an appropriation of a patent when a photographer takes aerial images of a company’s site on behalf of his or her client?

“….an appropriation of trade secrets to be wrongful there must be a trespass, other illegal conduct, or breach of a confidential relationship” (E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. v. Rolfe Christopher 1970, 1).

Analysis

            In this case, there was an appropriation of the company’s patent despite the defendant claiming he did not involve himself in any of the affirmed illegitimate actions. This is because he willingly acted on behalf of his client by taking aerial images of the complainant’s company while under construction (E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. v. Rolfe Christopher 1970, 2). Hence, take essential information about the firm products’ processes and other secrets that enable it to have an aggressive edge in the market. However, taking photographs with intent may not exactly be evident in the law, but his action translated to be an “improper” way whose core purpose entailed to attain information for his client (E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. v. Rolfe Christopher 1970, 2). This client might be a potential competitor behind the scenes for another company. Hence, end up utilizing DuPont’s innovation to its detriment. Since, the competitor has not toiled for it through either research or involved legal monetary means to attain the patent, for instance, buying the information.

Conclusion

            Christopher in this case is blameworthy of exposing the plaintiff’s patent. This is irrespective of him claiming his photographing actions were not evident in the law that might translate to attaining the company’s information illegally. His actions translate to be “Improper” ways of attaining information without the plaintiff’s consent (E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. v. Rolfe Christopher 1970, 2). Since there was no research involved or legal ways that would enable him to attain the information.