Pirates: Piracy and Golden Age

The Golden Age of piracy arose during an increase of trade goods through the Americas as well as large profit margins in Europe. The increasing production rates caused by the triangle trade gave England, France, and Spain incentives to invest more. The Britishunderstood the needs for each continent, and could support those needs while profiting greatly. During the Golden Age, many more goods traveled through unprotected waters making piracy an attractive profession. In addition, Piracy became very popular because of its democratic rule and tremendous acquired wealth for its crew members.

Increased trade circulation of valuables during this period caused the ‘Golden age’ because piracy boomed. When more money was invested in shipping fleets, the pirate’s had more opportunities to steal. The production rates of the traders far outweighed the stolen goods and money, but the pirates did cause severe losses for the traders that was consistent and damaging enough to be threatening. The created demand in Europe was vital to the English in order to continue profiting from their trade investment. The amplification of “trades in tobacco, sugar, slaves, and manufactures led English merchant shipping to expand” (Rediker &Linebaugh, 2001, 146).

Without a need for these goods, England would not have invested in the triangle trade and slavery in the West Indies would not have existed. The high demand of sugarcane caused slavery, piracy, and sugar plantations throughout the Caribbean. Slave trading made sugarcane production possible in the West Indies. As more sugar was demanded in Europe, more money, slaves, and goods would be circulating in the triangle trade. Williams described the triangle trade as a “triple stimulus to British industry” (Williams, 1994, 52). The West Indies had soil that was conducive to growing sugar. This crop gave the British a high marginal profit from the cheap labor of the increasing number of slaves.

Tars and pirates understood the social and economic construction of the trade. Even with a rising percentage of ships where pirates stole booty, the quantity of ships that the Europeans added compensated greatly. The downside to having more ships on trade routes was that the pirates could seize them more easily. Due to investors needing more ships, “shipbuilding in England received a direct stimulus from the triangular trade” (Williams, 1994, 58). The shipwrights in Liverpool had an extra investment in the trade because “they themselves were slave traders” (Williams, 1994, 58).

Many of the investors in the triangle trade actually monopolized more than one aspect of it. Those who had capital to invest in larger vessels were the ones who made their money from the plantations. The growth of wealth for the British investors was exponential because the profits automatically stimulated other related investments. The pirates and merchant sailors were not fond of one another, yet they each understood the economic system that was occurring. The European investors became extremely wealthy while their sailors were simply serving the government. The pirates negatively impacted the profits that Europeans earned, but the trade business was so profitable that the Europeans remained rich. Piracy had advantages and disadvantages for individual sailors, but the act of piracy had tremendous impact of the triangle trade, profits for European investors, and slavery in the Caribbean.

Read more

Global Software Piracy Case Study

MGT 440 International Buisness Name of the case: Global Software Piracy Prepared by: xxxx Date 16-03-2010 Executive Summary: This case is taking software piracy under the light that explained at the end of the third chapter of the book International Business environments and operations by Daniels in the 11th edition. Software piracy is the mislicensing, unauthorized reproduction and illegal distribution of software, whether for business or personal use. When someone copies software without buying the appropriate number of licenses, it is copyright infringement.

Individual copying software for a friend is a form of software piracy. Types of software piracy may include: end-user piracy, pre-installed software, Internet piracy, and counterfeiting, online auction piracy. Q1. What is the relationship among the various governments, institutions, organizations, and companies in developing legal codes to combat software piracy? Companies, industry associations and governments developed arrangement and legal codes to deal with software piracy. Governments have been passing and enforcing laws supporting copyrights.

The effort to condemn software piracy led to more governments joining the effort, associations such as BSA (Business Software Alliance) have members in more than 70 nations. All this effort can’t really provide significant results in the future. Other method has to be considered as well. Narrowing the gap in price of the legal and illegal copies, my encourage consumers to go for the legal copies. Other solutions is the introduction of new technologies that would limit if not kill software piracy, such as the introduction of cloud computing. Q2.

In your opinion, should software companies, industry associations, home governments, or transnational institutions take the lead in aggressively negotiating with the governments of countries with high piracy rates? Why? Reading up the case, you can see the enthusiasm that most governments shown in form of enforcing laws or taking actions as well. So, what I think is instead of pushing governments to negotiate with other high rated piracy countries may lead to more complexity in their political relationships. It would be better if complies make enquires by themselves or by watchdog associations such as BSA.

Other methods are through international trade channels. In the case with countries of high piracy rates, adjustments to their copyrights laws made above their accession to the WTO, china for example. Q3. Can the software industry expect to contain and control software piracy without eventually relying on governments to take a more active role? Why would the software industry dislike greater government regulation? Yes. I think software industry can contain and control software piracy without eventually relying on governments to take a more active role. This is done through technology innovation.

The introduction of cloud computing has opened the door to a future with no software piracy. Cloud computing is Internet-based computing, whereby shared resources, software and information are provided to computers and other devices on-demand, like electricity. Software are to be rented or incensed by paying a fees on the user of software and no such piracy is possible in this world, unless newly discovered! Q4. In your opinion, what rationale do you think consumers in high theft countries (see Table 3. 6) use to justify software piracy? Similarly, what ideas or conditions lead consumers in lower theft countries to respect IPRs?

Consumers in high theft countries tend to be more of a collectivists kind of cultures where is sharing is on of its primary features. While Consumers in high theft countries are individualistic. Q5. What sorts of political or legal solutions should the software industry lobby governments to apply to the piracy problem? Software companies should convince governments to enforce laws and legal actions in case of violations to the copyright laws. And keep pursuing international regulators such as WTO to establish piracy policies and protect the intellectual rights.

Read more

Piracy in Somalia and Its International Implications

PIRACY IN SOMALIA AND ITS INTERNATIONAL IMPLICATIONS In the past few years, pirate attacks off the coast of Somalia have received a great deal of public attention. According to the London-based International Maritime Bureau, there has been an “unprecedented increase” in Somali pirate activity in the first 9 months of 2009. Until September this year 147 incidents were reported off the Somali coast and in the Gulf of Aden (separating Somalia and Yemen), compared with 63 for the same period last year.

A total of 533 crew members have been taken hostage in 2009, out of which about 200 hostages are still being held by Somali pirates. I have chosen the topic of piracy for my essay as I think that in the context of the present world economy crisis it is a current problem which might affect all the participants of the global economy and it needs an urgent solution. In the first part of my essay I am going to present some data to demonstrate the importance of the problem, then I will focus on the background of the issue and present the different factors which have led to the appearance of piracy.

After a detailed description of the pirates and their way of operation I will move on to presenting of the interests of the international community and the policies, strategies and instruments they have used to deal with the issue. At the end of my paper I will draw some conclusions and make a few suggestions for the future. Piracy has been a problem in Somali waters for at least ten years. However, the number of attempted and successful attacks has risen over the last three years.

As the hijackings have increased in number, they have also become more sophisticated. The pirates are now able to capture larger targets as well. On September 25 2008, Somali pirates captured the MV Faina, a Ukrainian ship transporting weapons to Kenya. This was followed one month later by the hijacking of the MV Sirius Star, the largest ship ever captured by pirates. The Saudi-owned supertanker was carrying about 2 billion barrels of crude oil, worth about $100 million. The ship was finally released on January 9 for a $3 million ransom.

The series of hijackings has continued in 2009 too. It seems that this year the pirates have shifted from the Gulf of Aden, where dozens of ships were attacked in 2008 but which is now heavily patrolled, to the ocean between the African mainland and the Seychelles islands. In October 2009 Somali pirates captured a Chinese bulk carrier, carrying 25 Chinese crew members. In November they have seized a US tanker carrying $20 million of crude oil, which is considered the second-largest ship ever hijacked by pirates.

The tankers 30-member crew was also kidnapped. In the same month, 9 pirates hijacked the Greek-owned tanker Maran Centaurus carrying 275,000 metric tons of Saudi Arabian crude oil and have taken it to a pirate port along the coast, where they typically hold the boats for ransom. The 300,000-tonne ship was hijacked about 1,300 km from the coast of Somalia and there were 28 crew members on board which are all held hostages. According to the IBM, in October and November alone, 38 ships have been attacked and 10 hijacked.

There are several factors which have made Somalia the perfect environment for piracy, which I am going to present below. First of all, if we want understand why piracy works in Somalia, we have to know something about the geography and history of the country. Officially called the Republic of Somalia, Somalia is a country situated in the Horn of Africa, bordered by Djibouti to the northwest, Kenya to the southwest, the Gulf of Aden with Yemen to the north, the Indian Ocean to the east, and Ethiopia to the west.

Due to its strategic location, in the past the country was an important centre of commerce. Even today, about 16,000 ships pass through the Gulf of Aden each year, carrying oil from the Middle East and goods from Asia to Europe and North America, so we can say that one of the most important trade routes of the world can be found in this area. In addition, the long, isolated, sandy beaches of the country are also advantageous for pirates to operate. Another factor which helps piracy to flourish is the political anarchy which still rules in Somalia.

For almost 20 years, the country has endured political chaos and bloodshed. The Somali Civil, which began in 1991 as a revolution against the repressive regime of Siad Barre, has caused instability throughout the country. The northern parts of the country declared their independence, although it was neither recognized by the central government, nor by the United Nations. Subsequent fighting among rival warlords resulted in the killing, dislocation, and starvation of thousands of Somalis. Since 1991, 350,000-1,000,000 Somalis have died because of the conflict.

Hatred and lack of trust among the landlords and their clans has prevented the organisation of a functioning central government. From 2006-2009 Ethiopia was also involved in the conflict. In January 2009, Ethiopian soldiers withdrew from Somalia, leaving behind an African Union contingent of peacekeepers to help the fragile coalition government and its troops enforce their authority. Following Ethiopia’s withdrawal from Somalia, the southern half of the country fell into the hands of radical Islamist  rebels, who still control a big part of the country. The political situation is still chaotic in Somalia.

The present government, led by Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed is the 16th administration to „govern” the country since the collapse of the Barre regime. Order still hasn’t been restored, Somalia is governed by anarchy. Because of the lack of an effective central government and national economy, Somalia is still one of the world’s poorest countries, where the estimated GDP is around $600 per year. According to the World Bank, in 2008 73% of the country’s population lived on a daily income below $2. The country’s 10 million people are starving, and they would hardly survive without the food aid provided by the developed countries.

In a country where survival is at stake, it is no surprise that piracy has become a fast and easy way to make money and it could develop into a frightening business. To sum up, we can say that Somalia’s chaotic political situation, the lack of an effective central government, the poor state of the economy and poverty have all created an environment which was perfect for piracy to appear. But who are these “heroes” and how do they operate? In most people’s minds, the image of piracy is associated with characters like Jack Sparrow or Captain Cook.

Pirates are often seen as rebellious young men who are victims of the society, but have the courage to stand up for themselves and create a different way of working on the seas. Actually, there is some truth in this kind of perception. According to Eric Hobsbawm, a British historian, “social bandits” are “outlaws, drawing on community support, using criminal methods to challenge the present hierarchy of power and wealth. ” Most of the Somali pirates are 20-35 years old and come from the region of Puntland, a semi-autonomous region in northeastern Somalia.

It is estimated that there are at least five pirate gangs and more thousands armed men. A BBC report divided them into three main categories: local Somali fishermen (the “brains” of the operations because of their skills and knowledge of the sea); ex-militiamen (used as the “muscle”) and technical experts who are able to use electrical equipment, such as GPS devices at a professional level. It is a fact that since the country’s collapse in 1991, there has been a great amount of illegal fishing practised by a lot of countries along the Somali coast.

During the regime of Siad Barre (1986-1992) Somalia received aid from several countries to develop its fishing industry. Local fishermen had fixed prices for their catch and the fish was exported because of low demand for seafood in Somalia. However, after the fall of the Barre regime, due to the Somali Civil War the income from fishing decreased. Traditional coastal fishing became difficult, because foreign trawlers started fishing illegally along the Somali coast and depleted the fish stocks. Local fishermen became desperate. They started to band together and were determined to protect their resources.

They started attacking foreign trawlers, the crew of which soon fought back with heavy weapons. As a result, fishermen turned to other types of commercial ships and soon discovered that piracy was an easy way to make money. At the moment, piracy is Somalia’s most “lucrative business”: ship owners are willing to pay huge amounts of money for the release of their hijacked vessels. In addition to this, starting with the early 1990s, Somalia’s long, remote coastline has been used as a dump site for dangerous toxic waste from a lot of European and Asian companies.

The European Green party presented before the press and the European Parliament copies of contracts signed by two European companies – an Italian-Swiss and an Italian firm – and representatives of warlords, to accept 10 million tones of toxic waste in exchange for $80 million. For European companies this is a very cheap way of getting rid of their waste: while waste disposal costs in Europe are about $1,000 a tonne, this way it only costs them $2,50 a tonne. The effects of this dumping are already visible in Somalia.

According to a report by the UN Environment Programme, there is an extremely high number of cases of respiratory infections, mouth ulcers and bleeding and unusual skin infections among the inhabitants of the area – diseases related to radiation sickness. It is clear that this situation represents a very serious environmental risk not only to Somalia, but to the whole eastern Africa region. Many of the pirates call themselves the Somali “coast guard”, claiming that their aim is to defend their communities from overfishing and to protect the coastline from toxic dumping of nuclear waste by foreign ships.

In an interview one of the pirate leaders explained: “We don’t consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits those who illegally fish and dump in our seas”. The problem of overfishing is still a very serious problem is Somalia. It is estimated that Europeans and Asians poach around $300 million worth fish from Somali waters. On the other hand, Somali pirates collect about $100 million yearly from ransoms. This, according to Peter Lehr, a Somalia piracy expert, can be seen as a “resource swap”. Of course, a great number of pirates are only taking part in these operations for the money, and their families which they can feed this way.

As one of them, nicknamed Milk Sucker says: “Sometimes doing a bad thing is the only way to improve the situation for yourself and the people you love”. Some of the pirates can’t even swim, their only task is to shoot straight. A lot of young Somalis take part only in a couple of operations, hoping to make enough money to move to the West or maybe to persuade an ethnic Somali woman with a EU passport to marry them and move to the UK. As for the techniques used by the pirates, we can notice that they are getting more sophisticated and more effective.

They are using the latest high-tech equipment, like GPS, MANPADS (Man Portable Air Defence Systems), RPGs and satellite phones and they are well-armed with rocket-propelled grenades and AK-47s. They usually operate using small skiffs with powerful outboard engines, but now they regularly use “mother ships” to increase their range. These “mother ships” take them into the shipping lanes, several hundred miles offshore. Then they launch small speedboats to haul themselves up onto the deck of a ship. They can often seize a ship without firing a shot.

After capturing it, they sail the hijacked ship to the Somali pirate hub town, Eyl and take the hostages ashore where they are well-looked after until ransom is paid. It is reported that the pirates never harm their prisoners; they behave like “perfect gentlemen” with them. They even hire caterers on the Somali coast to cook pasta, grilled fish and roasted meat, which western hostages might like. Once ransom is paid, they release ships good humour. According to the Kenyan foreign minister, in 2008 pirates have received about $150 million in ransom, which is used to fund future operations.

In a recent startling Reuters report we can read that the pirates have started to make the money to work for them, setting up a stock exchange “that has drawn financiers from the Somali Diaspora and other nations. ” The bandits’ bourse is a small building in the once-small fishing village of Haradheere, about 250 miles northeast of Mogadishu, which has developed into a luxury town by now. As a former pirate named Mohammed puts it, “The shares are open to all and everybody can take part, whether personally at sea or on land by providing cash, weapons or useful materials … we’ve made piracy a community activity. “

Unfortunately, it has become clear that the activity of pirates is linked to warlords on shore. After seeing the profitability of the business, these leaders started to facilitate pirate activities, sharing the profit with the pirates. These “Godfathers” and clan leaders are closely related to Somalia’s president in Mogadishu, Abdullahi Yusuf, who also originates from Puntland. Estimates are that at least six ministers in the Puntland government are involved with the pirates. The only group which is publicly against piracy is the militant Al-Shabaab, a Salafist group founded this decade as a militia attached to the Islamic Court.

They say that such crimes are forbidden under the Islamic law. However, according some reports, militant Islamist groups also get their share of the profit. The pirates involvement with these organisations is making the situation even more alarming, because all the financial help given by the West to the Somali authorities to put an end to piracy might just help it to flourish. All in all, it is clear that piracy is not a problem that the fragile Somali government can solve alone and international help is needed. How does all this affect the international community?

Besides enforcing international law, there are several other reasons to stop pirate activities. The first is Somalia itself. The country needs about 200 tonnes of food aid a year which is mostly delivered by sea. Without the naval escorts and the regular delivery of aid, Somalia’s food stocks are seriously threatened, so ensuring the safe delivery of food aid should be a number one priority for the international community. Stopping piracy may also reduce the money available for weapons, so indirectly it can lead to the end of the internal war.

Piracy has a very distressing effect on international trade as well. In addition to the growing ransom, companies whose cargos do not reach their destinations, lose money. As a result, there is a growth of insurance for all ships which need to pass through the Gulf of Aden. The constant danger of pirate attacks has already made some shipping companies to choose a longer, but safer route, around the Cape of Good Hope, as it happened in the case of AP Moller-Maersk, one of Europe’s largest shipping companies after the hijacking of Sirius Star.

The extra weeks of travel and fuel can lead to the cost of transporting goods, which is a really serious concern now, at the time of a global economic crisis. Another reason is related to the environment. Pirate attacks can cause major oil spills in a very sensitive ecosystem. As pirates become bolder and use more powerful weapons, tankers could be set on fire or sunk, which can result in an environmental catastrophe, destroying marine and bird life for many years to come. Last, but not least, there is a risk that the pirates themselves can become agents of terrorism.

There are assumptions according to which pirates are connected to the Al-Shabaab movement, which is believed to have links to Al-Qa’eda. According to some reports, Al-Qa’eda militants from Iraq have chosen Somalia as a new base from which to launch attacks. Terrorism at sea can take many forms, for example direct attacks on ships, hostage dramas, but also hijacked ships used as potential weapons. Terrorist networks can use the financial funds from piracy to fund their operations worldwide. It is obvious, that even if there is little chance for the worst scenario, it is best to prevent it while we can.

The international community has recognized that enhanced international efforts are necessary in order to reduce the number of attacks. The growing cases of piracy have focused the world’s attention on Somalia and have shown that the crisis going on in a fragmented state is spilling out of its borders. The military response to piracy has shown that countries which haven’t been able to cooperate with each other can unite their forces for a common cause. A maritime conference was also held in Mombassa, where they discussed the problem of piracy and tried to give regional and world governments recommendations to deal with the danger.

In January 2009, an important regional agreement was adopted in Djibouti by States in the region, at a meeting organised by IMO. The Code of Conduct concerning the Repression of Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in the Western Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden recognized the extent of the problem of piracy and armed robbery against ships in the region and the states signing it declared their intention to co-operate, in a way consistent with international law, in the repression of piracy and armed robbery against ships.

Most countries have preferred prevention: various navies have sent war-ships into the area to escort commercial vessels. At the beginning, this way of defense was more individual than collective, but the persistence of the attacks has led to the development of a collective security system. NATO got the task of escorting convoys transporting the humanitarian aid of the World Food Programme towards Somalia. Once they were in the Gulf of Aden, they also protected other merchants ships, by their presence.

Later NATO handed the job to Operation Atlanta, the first common maritime mission by the European Union. Military counter-piracy operations are performed by vessels from the Combined Task Force 150, a multinational coalition naval task force  in charge of monitoring and inspecting a range of security issues, such as drug smuggling and weapons trafficking, as well as piracy. Several countries, including India, Russia, China, Norway, Australia, France, Greece, Turkey, Portugal, Denmark, the Netherlands, South Korea, Malaysia and even Japan chose to join the coalition and send warships to the Gulf of Aden.

In January 2009 the US navy established a new multi-national naval force to confront piracy off the Somali coast. The new unit was called Combined Task Force 151and it was a spinoff of the existing Task Force 150 in the region. This section of the coalition forces was aimed at focusing exclusively on pirate groups (leaving Combined Task Force 150 to focus on other destabilizing activities, such as drug smuggling and weapons trafficking). It was hoped that by designating a new unit to combating piracy in Somalia, anti-piracy efforts would be more successful.

Unfortunately, this effort is having only a limited impact. Although some pirates are scared off by the sight of military ships and helicopters, coalition warships are often in the wrong place at the wrong time. In addition, pirates are flexible and change their tactics easily: data from the Maritime Bureau shows that at present they are conducting their operations further out in the Indian Ocean. Besides, this is a very costly solution which is difficult to support in the long term.

After the hijacking of an Egyptian ship and a huge Saudi supertanker, the Arab League organized a summit for countries overlooking the Red Sea, with the participation of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Somalia, Jordan, Djibouti and Yemen. At the summit the participant states discussed several solutions for the problem of piracy, suggesting different routes and looking for a safer passageway for ships. They might also assist the current NATO anti-piracy efforts together with other nations.

However, we shouldn’t forget that the Arab League has long tried to draw Somalia more closely to the Arab world. It has made a financial support for the Transitional Federal Government, conditional on its entering negotiations with Al-Shabaab, intending to spread Islamist influence in the area. In June 2008 the United Nations Security Council passed a declaration authorizing nations that have the agreement of the Transitional Federal Government to enter Somali territorial waters to hunt pirates.

In 2008 the Security Council adopted two resolutions, 1846 and 1851 allowing for the first time international land and sea occupations of Somali territories in the pursuit of pirates. These resolutions extended the power of the states and lead to greater coordination of their efforts. After the Council resolution 1851, the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia was established on 14 January 2009 to facilitate and coordinate actions among states and organizations to deal with piracy. At the moment 46 States and seven international organizations take part in the Contact Group.

Through its four working groups, the Contact Group addresses specific issues related to military and operational coordination, legal issues, shipping industry awareness and public and diplomatic information. UNODC (the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) participates in the Contact Group and its Working Group on Military and Operational Coordination, Information Sharing and Capability-Building. UNODC acts as secretariat to Working Group on Judicial Issues, to which it has provided various forms of support.

UNODC has prepared an analysis of the legal and practical challenges involved in prosecuting suspected pirates and is gathering nformation on relevant national legal systems, including those of coastal States. In spite of the fact that laws to combat piracy at sea exist, a lot of states do not seem to use them in practice. Only France has chosen to combat piracy directly. The first case was the seizing of a yacht in April 2008, which started with negotiations for the release of 30 hostages and followed by the capture of six pirates in Somali territory.

The second case took place in September 2008 to free a couple taken hostages. This action also led to the arrest of six pirates, who are awaiting trial before a French court. Britain and some other countries have found a superficial and convenient way of treating the pirates: they have negotiated a treaty with Kenya, according to which all those suspected of piracy are handed over to that country. A few months later other countries followed Britain’s example, negotiating similar agreements. These agreements are a useful step, but they do not solve the problem.

The Kenyan prison system is in terrible condition, corruption is high, there are strong delays in the call of trials and legal aid is very limited. It is a paradox indeed that states which are entitled to prosecute the arrested pirates delegate this right to a country which is unable to assure a fair trial to these criminals. In spite of the united efforts of different nations, it has become clear that the piracy problem cannot be solved at sea, because it is rooted on the shore, in the ongoing conflict and political instability of the country.

As Ban Ki-Moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations expressed at an international donors’ conference: “Piracy is a symptom of anarchy and insecurity on the ground. (…) More security on the ground will make less piracy on the seas” Any lasting solution to the problem has to involve ensuring stability, development and an effective criminal justice system in Somalia. If the states had invested the time and resources they now spend to stop piracy in reconstructing the Somali society and economy, they probably wouldn’t have to cope with these problems.

However, there are always new opportunities that shouldn’t be wasted. Martin Murphy in his article “Somali Piracy: not just a Naval Problem” claims that the highest costs of piracy to Somalia and the international community are not economic, but political. As I mentioned earlier, it seems that almost all layers of political life in Somalia are involved in piracy, including the Islamist groups. Islamism is getting stronger and stronger in Somalia and it can soon get hold of the entire country. The Al-Shabaab movement has a clear intention to use Somalia as a base for spreading Islamist influence in the region.

If this tendency continues, a worst possible outcome would be an Islamist government, which is strong enough to control piracy, but also strong enough to make Somalia safe for violent Islamist groups. So, what can be done to stop, or at least to decrease piracy in the Horn of Africa? Somalia is a clan-based society. Therefore, a possible solution would be to deal with the sub-state entities in order to create a unitary state in the future. In these negotiations the coalition should clearly commit itself to repress piracy in return for allied political and economic support.

This way it would be possible to cut off all the political players in Somalia from their external sources of weapons and thus pirates would be trapped between more effective land-base policy by the Somalis and maritime policy by coalition member navies and soon they would have no place to hide. Recent efforts have shown that there is a will to act together. We can only hope that the states will find a way to deal effectively with the problem before it is too late. Links, references: Roger Middleton: Piracy in Somalia. Africa Programme, October 2008 http://www. chathamhouse. org. uk/files/12203_1008piracysomalia. df Marina Chiarugi and Daniele Archibugi: Piracy challenges global governance. Open Democracy, 9 April 2009 http://www. opendemocracy. net/article/piracy-challenges-global-governance George Grant: Somali pirates can’t be beaten at sea. The Guardian, 18 November 2009 http://www. guardian. co. uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/18/somali-pirates-ransom-puntland Galrahn: Somalia Piracy – A Backgrounder April 8, 2009 http://www. informationdissemination. net/2009/04/somalia-piracy-backgrounder. html Rubrick Biegon: Somali Piracy and the International Response. FPIF (Foreign Policy in Focus) January 29, 2009 http://www. pif. org/fpiftxt/5827 Georg-Sebastian Holzer: Somalia: piracy and politics. Open Democracy, 24 November 2008 http://www. opendemocracy. net/article/somalia-piracy-and-politics Johann Hari: You Are Being Lied to About Pirates. The Huffington Post, December 2009 http://www. huffingtonpost. com/johann-hari/you-are-being-lied-to-abo_b_155147. html Can Somali pirates be defeated? BBC News, 20 November 2009 http://news. bbc. co. uk/2/hi/8371139. stm Sam Gustin: Bandit Bourse? Somali pirates hijack oil tanker, organize ‘stock market’ Daily Finance, December 1 2009 http://www. dailyfinance. om/2009/12/01/bandit-bourse-somali-pirates-hijack-oil-tanker-organize-stock/ Martin Murphy: Somali Piracy : not just a naval problem . Centre for Strategic and Bugetary Assessments, April 16, 2009 http://www. csbaonline. org/4Publications/PubLibrary/B. 20090417. Somali_Piracy/B. 20090417. Somali_Piracy. pdf Piracy in Somalia: Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Piracy_in_Somalia Aiden Hartley: What I learned from the Somali pirates. The Spectator, 6 December 2008 http://www. spectator. co. uk/essays/all/3061246/what-i-learned-from-the-somali-pirates. thtml

Read more

Thomas Jefferson report card

The Barbara Pirates are a great example as to how Jefferson dealt with problems with foreign people. The pirates would take crew members from ships and demand payment on behalf of America, after making the decision to put an end to the payments to the pirates Jefferson sent a naval to punish them; although semi contradicting his devotion to peace and economy. Later on after in 181 5 Stephen Decatur was sent to the Mediterranean to where a treaty renouncing both raids and tribute were signed.

Although It wasn’t something totally eliminating the racketeers from being wicked it still was a success on behalf of Jefferson; he was able to lead the world toward a path of free seas and peace for all nations. Jefferson so far was able to fulfill his promises to keep peace and friendship with other nations. The relations between the new United States and European nations were pleasant and the Barbara Pirates had compelled admiration for the American flag. Intense admiration should be given to Jefferson for he was able to handle the impressments of American seaman In an appropriate manner.

He was able to keep calm and not go to war with Britain even though there was a vast amount of anger In the United States towards the situation. Instead of going Into something more drastic such as war, Jefferson simply demanded the British to stay out of the U. G’s waters and for an apology. Lastly In relation to foreign relations, In 1803 war between France and Britain was renewed. As a war tactic each nation attempted to affect their opponent’s trade using neutral nations such as the United States.

Jefferson saw this and In an attempt to keep peace between the United States and other nations, there was the Embargo Act which cut off the United States trade In hopes of getting Britain and Napoleon Into terms. (Embargo Act of 1802) Jefferson was unsuccessful when It came to the Embargo act; neither the French nor Britain needed the American trade as much as American trade needed them therefore not making a difference when It came to scaring the nations. What this would have done Instead of scaring Napoleon and Britain out of their conflict was, demolish the

American commerce which was what It was trying to protect. Jefferson as a president managed to fulfill a lot of his promises made In his Inaugural address regarding keeping peace and honest friendships with other nations. He was very successful and although he had a failure with the Embargo Act he still attempted to make a change therefore his grade of a B Is accurate due to his successful attempts and failure of the Embargo Act. Thomas Jefferson report card By watermelon United States at peace with nations in Europe during his first term, as wealth and tooth raids and tribute were signed.

Although it wasn’t something totally eliminating impressments of American seaman in an appropriate manner. He was able to keep calm and not go to war with Britain even though there was a vast amount of anger in the United States towards the situation. Instead of going into something more waters and for an apology. Lastly in relation to foreign relations, in 1803 war Jefferson saw this and in an attempt to keep peace between the United States and other nations, there was the Embargo Act which cut off the United States trade in popes of getting Britain and Napoleon into terms. Embargo Act of 1802).

Read more

Law of the Sea

Territorial Sea is established up to 12 miles from the baseline of the coast. This is an extension of the land and the coastal state exerts full sovereignty over the area. It is an area of national jurisdiction. Also establishes a contiguous zone where the coastal State may exercise the control necessary to (1) prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations (2) punish infringement of the above laws and regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea.

The contiguous zone may not extend beyond 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. 1 Compare and contrast the powers of coastal states in internal waters, the territorial sea and the contiguous zone. Internal Waters are assimilated into the territory of the state. A coastal state may exercise jurisdiction over foreign ships within its internal waters to enforce its laws, although the judicial authorities of the flag state may also act where crimes have occurred on board the ship. There exists therefore a concurrent jurisdiction. 1] A merchant vessel in a foreign port or in foreign internal waters is automatically subject to local jurisdiction unless the matter was concerning general conduct of the crew where it did not threaten peace and security it would be left, through courtesy to the flag state. In the case of a warship however the authorisation of the captain or of the flag state is necessary before the coastal state may exercise its jurisdiction. Due to the status of warships as a direct arm of the sovereign if the flag state. Contiguous Zone – Historically some states have claimed to exercise rights over particular zones of the high seas.

This has diluted the principle of the freedom of the high seas. There have been numerous reasons for such extended authority including (1) prevention of infringement on customs, immigration or sanitary laws (2) to conserve fishing stock (3) to enable coastal state to have exclusive or principal rights. It enables coastal states to protect something without extending their territorial sea and is a compromise measure. These zones are not attached to the land territory in law. Concept was introduced in 1930 by French writer Gidel and it appeared in the Convention on the Territorial Sea.

Sanitary and immigration enforcement is justifiable by the 1958 Convention but protection of customs has long been established. Contiguous zones were restricted to within 12 miles so a state which had claimed a 12 mile territorial sea were exempt from this. This coupled with the restriction of jurisdiction to customs, sanitary and immigration maters is the reason for the decline in the relevance of contiguous zones in recent years. However, based on the 1982 Convention a state may claim up to 24 miles in order to preserve the concept.

The 1982 Convention also changed the status of the contiguous zone from being part of the high seas to part of the EEZ. Territorial Sea comes within the sovereignty of a coastal state also extending to the airspace. These were drafted in the 1982 Convention and represent customary international law. Width of the territorial sea is set at 12 miles. Coastal state may also exclude foreign nationals and vessels from fishing within its territorial sea and, subject to agreements to the contrary, from coastal trading and reserve these activities for its own citizens.

Coastal state also has extensive powers relating to security and customs matters. Jurisdiction over foreign ships when in passage through territorial sea, the coastal state may only exercise its criminal jurisdiction as regards the arrest of any person or the investigation of any matter connected with a crime committed on board ship in defined situations. These are cited in Article 27(1) of the 1982 Convention, reaffirming Article 19(1) of the 1958 Convention. (1) if the consequences of the crime extend to the coastal state. 2) if the crime is of a kind likely to disturb the peace of the coastal state (3) if the assistance of the local authorities has been requested (4) if such measures are necessary for the suppression of illicit traffic in drugs. If the ship is travelling through the territorial sea having left internal waters then the coastal state may act in any manner within its laws. Authorities cannot act if the crime was committed before entering the territorial sea and the ship has not been in internal waters.

Article 28 of the 1982 Convention states that coastal states must not divert a foreign ship for the purpose of exercising civil jurisdiction in relation to a person on board ship, nor levy execution against or arrest the ship, unless obligations are involved which were assumed by the ship. Warships and other governmental ships are immune from the sovereignty of the coastal states altogether. 1 What rights of passage, if any, do vessels of other nations enjoy in the territorial sea or internal waters? Internal Waters – there does not exist any right of innocent passage from which the shipping of other states may benefit.

The exception to this rule is where the straight baselines enclose as internal waters what had been previous territorial waters. Territorial Sea it is taken as custom that foreign merchant ships may travel unhindered through these zones. It is open to interpretation particularly that the passage must be ‘innocent’. Article 14 of the 1958 Convention said that states must make known dangers in territorial seas, must not hinder innocent passage, and may not impose charges for this passage unless in exchange for services. Passage ceases to be innocent here when it “is prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. Where passage is not innocent the coastal state may take steps to prevent it and may act to stall any approach to internal waters. Coastal states can temporarily suspend passage where security is threatened or at risk. Developed in the 1982 Convention Article 19(2). A key provision may have altered the burden of proof from coastal state to the ship to prove that passage is innocent. There is debate over the passage of warships in peacetime however it seems that former key protester Russia has agreed these provisions also cover warships as does the United States. 1 What are the major rights and powers of a coastal state in its EEZ?

What rights do other states enjoy there? Development – developed from claims regarding fishing zones. Marks a compromise between those states seeking a 200 mile territorial sea (due to controversy over fishing zones) and those wishing a more restricted system of coastal state power. 1958 Convention reached no agreement on fishing zones and Article 24 does not give exclusive fishing rights in the contiguous zone. Still states have claimed these zones. European Fisheries Convention (1964) provided that the coastal state has exclusive right to fish and jurisdiction in matters of fisheries within 6 miles from baseline of the territorial sea.

Between 6-12 miles other parties may fish there providing they had previously. In view of the practice of many states in accepting at one time or another the existence of a 12 mile fishing zone that can be seen as customary international law. [2] 1970 Iceland claimed 50 mile exclusive zone. UK/Germany referred to ICJ and the Court did not answer the question of legality. They held that Iceland’s extension was not binding as no acquiescence. Court emphasised the notion of preferential rights which it regarded as customary international law. 3] Developments took place in 1982 and Article 55 of the Convention provides that the EEZ is an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea, subject to the specific legal regime established under the Convention. Legal Situation Today [4] – EEZ starts from the outer limit of the territorial sea but shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles (Article 57) from the baselines. EEZ would be no more than 188 miles when 12 mile territorial sea existed. Where distance between neighboring states is less than 400 miles then delimitation becomes necessary.

Article 58 establishes rights of other states in the EEZ and are basically the high seas freedom of navigation, over flight and the laying of submarine cables and pipelines. States should have regard in this though for the laws of the coastal state. Article 60(2) provides than in the EEZ the coastal state has jurisdiction to apply customs law and regulations in respect of structures and artificial islands. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea took the view in the M/V Saiga Case that a coastal state was not competent to apply customs laws in other parts.

ICJ declared EEZ to be part of customary law in the Libya/Malta Continental Shelf Case. 1 What is meant by the concept of exclusive flag state jurisdiction of the high seas? On the high seas the maintenance of order has rested upon the concept of the nationality of the ship, and the jurisdiction of the flag state. The flag state will enforce the rules and regulations not only of its own municipal law but of international law also. Ship without a flag is deprived of many benefits and rights. Each state must show reason for allowing a ship to register under its flag and their must exist a genuine link (Article 91, UNCLOS).

To prevent people using flags for tax or wage purposes. Lotus case and then the 1958 and 1982 Conventions state clearly that the only authority exerted upon ships on the high seas is that of the flag state. What comprises a genuine link? Issue arose in the Iran-Iraq war with UK/US re-flagging Kuwaiti tankers. Held they did not violate law and the Tribunal held in the M/V Saiga Case that it was to the jurisdiction of the flag state to grant nationality to the ship. Tribunal stated here that ships may sail only under one flag and if they flew more than one were stateless and stateless vessels may be boarded and seized on the high seas. What are the major exceptions to it? (1) Right of visit is where warships are allowed to approach to ascertain the nationality of ships. Does not give a right to board but merely to identify. Warship must be careful as they are liable for damages. May only be undertaken if ship is engaged in piracy, broadcasting, stateless, engaged in slave trading. (2) Piracy is illegal acts committed for private ends which excludes hijacking. Any state may arrest and seize in this case and the courts of that state may decide what action to take regarding the vessel and property subject to the rights of third parties who have acted in good faith. 3) Slave Trade should be prevented in accordance with Article 99 of the 1982 Convention. Every state should take measures and punish the transport of slaves authorised to fly its flag and prevent the use of its flag for such purposes in future. Any slave taking refuge on board any ship is ipso facto free. (4) Unauthorised broadcasting stated in Article 109 of the 1982 Convention. Any person engaged in this can be prosecuted by the flag state of the ship, the state of registry of the installation, the state of which the person is a national or any state where the transmission can be received or where authorised communication is disrupted. 5) Hot Pursuit is a principle designed to ensure that a vessel which has infringed the rules of a coastal state cannot escape punishment by fleeing to the high seas. Coastal state may extend jurisdiction as stated in Article 111 of the 1982 Convention. Pursuit must begin when the ship or one of its boats is in internal waters or territorial sea and may only continue uninterrupted. If the pursuit begins in the contiguous zone then it must violate the rights of protection which the zone was established for. Pursuit must come after a visible demand to stop and can only be done by government vessels.

Right to pursuit ceases when the ship enters its own territorial waters of those of a third state. Use of force in this area must be avoided if possible and if necessary be proportional and reasonable. (6) Collisions was overruled from the Lotus Case by the Article 11 of the High Seas Convention. Proceedings may only be taken against the master or other persons in the service of the ship by authorities of either the flag state or the state to which the person is a national. Reaffirmed in Article 97 of the 1982 Convention. 7) Treaty Rights often exist permitting each others warships to exercise certain powers of visit and search as regards vessels flying the flags of the signatories. (8) Pollution by Article 24 of the High Seas Convention. States had a duty to adopt measures as necessary for the conservation of the living resources of the high seas. International Convention relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution allows ships to act “as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and imminent danger to their coastline or related interests from pollution or threat of pollution of the sea by oil. Developed because of the Torrey Canyon incident where UK aircraft bombed a ship spilling oil on UK/French coastline which had run aground. 1982 Convention leaves jurisdiction to the flag state but imposes mandatory minimums. (9) Straddling Stocks. Article 56(1) of the 1982 Convention provides that coastal states have sovereign rights over their EEZs for the purpose of exploiting, conserving and managing fish stocks. These are accompanied by duties as to conservation and managements measures to ensure that the fish stocks are not endangered.

Where the stock exists across two EEZs the states must co-ordinate and ensure the conservation and development of such stocks. Definitions 1. Contiguous Zone – and zone near by, adjacent to or neighboring the territorial sea. 2. Internal Waters – deemed to be such parts of the sea as are not either the high seas or relevant zones or the territorial sea, are accordingly classed as appertaining to the land territory of the coastal state. They can be, for example, lakes, rivers, harbours and are waters found on the landward side of the baselines from which the width of the territorial and other zones is measured. 3.

EEZ – Exclusive Economic Zone 4. Baselines – the basis for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea. The baseline is the low water mark around the coasts of the state. Traditional principle and emphasised in both 1958 and 1982 Declarations. 5. Delimitation – where states cannot have a territorial sea of 12 miles due to proximity of baselines. ——————————————————————— [1]R v Anderson (1868) the Court of Criminal Appeal in the UK declared that an American national who had committed manslaughter on a British ship in French internal waters was subject to jurisdiction by all three states.

Wildenhus Case the US Supreme Court held that American courts had jurisdiction to try a crew member of a Belgian vessel for the murder of another Belgian national when the ship was docked in Jersey. [2] International Court remarked as such in the Fisheries Jurisdiction cases especially since the 1960 Geneva Conference. Stated that “the extension of that fishing zone up to a 12 mile limit from the baselines appears now to be generally accepted. ” [3] Where the state was said to be “in a situation of special dependence on coastal fisheries. ” [4] Provided in Article 55 of the 1982 Convention

Read more

Software Piracy Problem

Software piracy is a rising problem not only in the United States, but around the world. In 1993 worldwide software piracy cost 12. 5 billion dollars to the software industry, with a loss of 2. 2 billion dollars in the United States alone. Estimates show that over 40 percent of U. S. software company revenues are generated overseas, yet nearly 85 percent of the software industry’s piracy losses occurred outside of the United States borders.

The Software Publishers Association indicated that approximately 35 percent of the business software in the United States were obtained illegally, which 30 percent of the piracy occurs in corporate settings. In a corporate setting or business, every computer must have its own set of original software and the appropriate number of manuals. It is illegal for a corporation or business to purchase a single set of original software and than load that software onto more than one computer, or lend, copy or distribute software for any reason without the prior written consent of the software manufacturer.

Many software managers are concerned with the legal compliance, along with asset management and costs at their organizations. Many firms involve their legal departments and human resources in regards to software distribution and licensing. In 1974, Congress created the Natural Commission on New Technological Uses (CONTU) to investigate whether the evolving computer technology field outpaced the existing copyright laws and also to determine the extent of copyright protection for computer programs.

CONTU concluded that while copyright protection should extend beyond the literal source code of a computer program, evolving case law should determine the extent of protection. The commission also felt that copyright was the best alternative among existing intellectual property protective mechanisms, and CONTU rejected trade secret and patents as viable protective mechanisms. The CONTU report resulted in the 1980 Computer Software Act, and the report acts as informal legislative history to aid the courts in interpreting the Act.

In 1980 The Copyright Act was amended to explicitly include computer programs. Title 17 to the United States Code states that it is illegal to make or to distribute copies of copyrighted material without authorization, except for the users right to make a single backup copy for archival purposes. Any written material (including computer programs) fixed in a tangible form is considered copyrighted without any additional action on the part of the author.

Therefore, it is not necessary that a copy of the software program be deposited with the Copyright Office in Washington, D. C. for the program to be protected as copyrighted. With that in mind then a copyright is a property right only. In order to prevent anyone from selling your software programs, you must ask a federal court to stop that person by an injunction and to give you damages for the injury they have done to you by selling the program.

Read more

Internet Piracy and Its Economic Effects

The ongoing dispute over illegal Internet-based file sharing between the entertainment and software industries and the vast, online pirating community has been one of the most debated upon topics that has gripped public attention for the past decade. What was once a single public website created by a college dropout has become an empire of trafficking communities, used by hundreds of millions of people, that robs billions in revenue each year.

Although these rogue websites claim to strictly serve only as hosts for illegal file sharing, the United States government must take action to eliminate Internet piracy and protect copyright by implementing digital encryption technologies and strict laws that prohibit tampering these encryptions. The trafficking of copyrighted goods must be put to an end because it promotes illegal transactions of an owner’s intellectual property, causing sales in the entertainment and software industries to plummet and thereby restricts the growth of the economy.

Internet piracy is the unlawful reproduction and/or distribution of any copyrighted digital file without the consent of the owner. It is driven by the consumers demand for a desirable product that would otherwise be unobtainable, either because of financial limitations or cultural factors, such as the Chinese culture’s emphasis that the free sharing of knowledge creates and preserves both civilization and traditional values across generations (Lu 310).

Consequently, such a mindset that has caused many people to believe piracy to be the solution to their individual economic problems has resulted in the slow, yet unrelenting destruction of the economy. Spearheaded by several websites hosting millions of users every day, illegal file sharing services have robbed entertainment and software companies of billions of dollars each year and have direct correlations to the current economic depression.

The era of internet piracy began in May of 1999 when a college student founded an internet website called Napster that allowed users to upload and download music for free through connected computer networks (Internet Piracy). In the first four months of its initial release, Napster hosted roughly 1 million users (Bach 4). After one year, however, the service became so popular that the Napster community expanded to an unprecedented 20 million users. Though it was eventually charged for copyright infringement and lost a series of legal battles, Napster had already introduced the world to internet piracy.

For the first time ever, Napster, in just two years, caused the music industry, specifically in compact disc sales, to steadily lose roughly $500 million in revenue in each preceding year (Bach 5). The damage that these rogue websites have done to the entertainment industry by promoting and hosting file sharing services has been catastrophic. In the fifth annual global piracy study by the Business Software Alliance, BSA discovered that in 2007, “Worldwide, for every two dollars’ worth of software purchased legally, one dollars’ worth was obtained illegally. BSA) “

Not only is internet piracy hurting the economy by dramatically lowering sales in the worldwide market, it is also making it increasingly difficult for artists, developers and their companies to produce new content to stimulate economic growth because of the daunting fact that their product will more likely be copied and redistributed rather than acquired legally through purchase. In the United States music industry, for example, the NPD group reported that only 37% of music acquired by consumers in 2009 was paid for (RIAA). If there is no payout, producers have less incentive to quickly develop new content.

Likewise, without the revolving door of investment and revenue, the ability to bring the next generation of talent, such as artists and inventors, to the marketplace is diminished- as is the incentive for the aspiring talent to pursue a full time career in his or her (Gee 20). Furthermore, a decreasing amount of new products entering the market, coupled with the increasingly scarce number of new talents willing to enter the slumping entertainment industry and the continuously growing pirating community will only add fuel to the pre-existing fire that is the recession.

Previously passed bills Protect IP Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act have done little in the war against Internet piracy as a majority of the pirating sites have turned to Bit Torrent technology as the method of choice to avoid drawing blame for directly handling intellectual property during illegal transactions. This advanced protocol maximizes transfer speed by gathering pieces of the file you want and downloading these pieces simultaneously from the computers of those who have downloaded from the same source- referred to as “seeders (Carmack 1, 3).

As of 2009, Bit Torrent file sharing has accounted for approximately 43% to 70% of Internet trafficking, making it one of the biggest contributors to the declining entertainment and software industry (Schulze). Although it would be impossible to shut down every rogue website that provides file sharing services, it is possible to prevent consumers from uploading purchased products onto these sites by implementing digital encryption keys that are unique to each product, in which content is distributed not as raw data, but rather inside a secure container (Bach 7).

Dubbed “Digital Rights Management (DRM), ” these technologies have already been implemented in America’s motion picture industry and have greatly limited the number of pirated DVD’s. Moreover, digital encryption keys may be able to help stimulate the economy. Consider the notion that a good must be scarce, exclusive and rivalrous in order to draw consumer demand. Now, take into account that illegally copying and redistributing a good on the internet has zero marginal cost.

The majority of people would rather commit to the latter instead of paying for said good, therefore eliminating rivalry, scarcity and exclusiveness in the market. If, however, encryption keys were to be equipped to each product, DRM would re-establish excludability and thus an artificial notion of rivalry and scarcity because each product would require a unique key code acquired upon purchasing the good (Bach 9). Companies would have more control over the distribution of its property while consumers can still keep their legally purchased product.

What is more, the addition of laws prohibiting the tampering of these keys as well as severe punishment and fines would act as a strong deterrence to piracy. Unless the United States government adopts the ideas of implementing digital encryption technologies and passing strict laws that severely punish those who tamper with these electronic locks, the cycle of economic depression and inflation of products in the market will continue forever.

Some may argue that these ideas to reinforce copyright will tip the balance of power away from consumers to the producers and also infringe upon the rights of an individual’s freedom of expression, the right to privacy, and the right to communicate (Lu 299). Yet, implementing key codes and laws to protect them (key codes) in no way limit a person’s right to speech, privacy, nor expression. For instance, a boy named Bob purchases a digital version of the hit song “Gangnam Style” and really enjoys the instrumental as well as lyrics.

Though he cannot upload his copy of “Gangnam Style”” to the Internet and share it with others, he may still express his feelings about the song and tell others why he likes it. Bob is not restricted to enjoying the song by himself. In fact, he can post links of his new favorite song to his Twitter, Facebook, or any website; he just cannot distribute HIS copy in any way to anyone else. Though suggested method of protecting copyright may seem like it infringes about human rights, it does not. It merely serves, literally, as a protective cage surrounding your digital content.

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp