Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Corporate Governance

By Peter C. Sprung
February 24, 2005

Recent amendments to the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines make several significant changes to the provisions concerning corporate compliance programs, and reinforce broader shifts taking place in the field of corporate governance. Just as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act imposes additional duties on corporate boards for the integrity of a company's financial controls, the new guidelines seek to make boards responsible for promoting the effectiveness of a corporation's legal and ethical controls. Boards of directors must assume responsibility for the effectiveness of compliance programs, which now encompass not only criminal laws but also ethics and corporate culture.

Boards and senior management are impelled to continuously police corporate integrity by using care not to place miscreants into positions of authority and by taking swift and decisive action in response to instances of wrongdoing. The amendments are intended to stimulate the flow of information about potential ethics and compliance violations by obliging corporations to implement a system for employees and agents to report misconduct without fear of retaliation and providing confidentiality guarantees as necessary.

While there is no “one size fits all” approach for complying with the guidelines, the board of directors should, among other things:

  • Ensure that senior management consist of persons of high moral character and that a climate of accountability and transparency prevails at all levels of the company;
  • Assume personal responsibility for overseeing compliance matters;
  • Undergo ethics and compliance training themselves;
  • Ensure that the corporation has a senior compliance officer, who should have direct access to the board;
  • Ensure that compliance activities are adequately funded; and
  • Have compliance programs audited by independent experts.

For its part, senior management should set the proper “tone at the top” by clearly and forcefully communicating the corporation's ethical values through a variety of means ' and then backing up those words with genuine action. This includes, among other things:

  • Holding business unit heads accountable for meeting compliance objectives;
  • Ensuring the effectiveness and independence of compliance staff;
  • Responding promptly and forthrightly to allegations of wrongdoing;
  • Praising and rewarding ethical conduct and meting out firm but fair punishment to wrongdoers, even if they are “big producers”; and
  • Institute other mechanisms that allow management to detect problems before they arise and implement internal controls that deter misconduct.

Background

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.