Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Security and ethics of software
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Security and ethics of software
The United States Vs. The European Union: An Ethical Analysis of Software Patents
Introduction
Patents have become a major part of technology in our society. The overall purpose of patents is to promote the disclosure of innovations so that others may make improvements based on those new technologies, while at the same time rewarding those who came up with the invention. They give the inventor of an innovation a monopoly of their innovation for a limited amount of time. After the time period has expired, anyone is free to use the innovation as they wish. Patents have worked well over the past century, enabling innovators to make technological improvements that would have been impossible without the help of prior inventions. Software Engineering is an engineering field that is very new relative to the other areas of science and engineering. Software Engineering is very different from any other kind of engineering. Ethically it is unreasonable to be able to apply the old patent laws to this new field of Software Engineering, without making any modifications to the laws. Software patents are not wrong entirely, in that it is still good to provide rewards to those who innovate. According the United States patent system, ideas are not patentable, while innovations are patentable. Software engineering blurs the line between ideas and innovation, in that software can be viewed as both an idea in the sense that it is a series of mathematical expressions, or it can be viewed as an innovation in that it can be delivered as an executable product. If patents are to be issued for software, a different system of laws governing software innovations needs to be established. The discrepancy on how to treat patents in software is illustrated by the opposing stances of the United States (who issues software patents) and the European Union (who does not issue software patents).
History of Patents
The main idea behind patents is to promote technological innovations. For there to be technological innovation for society as a whole, two things must happen. First, people must be able to study other people's innovations in order to further technology in society, because they can use the ideas of others to make even greater innovations. Second, people must have incentive to innovate. The most obvious solution to the first idea would be to make all innovations public, so that as soon as someone invents something, others are free to build off of it to further technology.
United States versus Microsoft Corporation case was a set of combined civil engagements filed against Microsoft relating to the Sherman Antitrust Act by the Department of Justice. In the case, the Department of Justice purported that Microsoft abused monopoly supremacy on PCs in its control of OS sales and web browser software sales (Lohr& Brinkley, 2001). The conflict evolved around the integration of the internet explorer browser software in Microsoft’s Windows OS; a move that was argued to restrict web browser competitors like Opera and Netscape from accessing the browser market. Microsoft argued that it did not have a case to answer and stated the misfortune was the result of the fierce competition and innovation strategies in its industry (Glader, 2006). The following paper aims at analyzing the merits generated from the final settlement of the case and outlines the parties that benefited and those whose interests were harmed.
According to Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, theft is, "The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same" (Webster's 2). Before the advent of moveable type, no one had cause to apply this concept to information rather than physical property. If one were to steal a book, the act was easily recognized as of the same moral color as stealing a horse, a nugget of gold, or any other physical object. The thief?s possession of the stolen item constituted the rightful owner?s lack of it, a loss both real and measurable. Today, theft seems a hazier concept, due to the popularization and codification of Intellectual Property (IP) rights. IP rights differ from standard property rights in that they signify an individual's right of ownership over "intangible things" (Kinsella 3). Arguably, the most important such things are patents and copyrights. Patents protect inventions, and copyrights protect "original forms of expression" (Fisher 1). In both cases, the right to ownership amounts to ownership of an idea, not a physical object.
Advances in technology has brought many benefits but also problems. The use of new technology creates moral and ethical problems and conflicting attitudes in society. The complexity of the issues and the pace with which technology changes mean that legislators have difficulty making laws that can keep in control of these changes.
In the article “Difference Between ‘Invention’ and ‘Innovation’”, Tom Grasty claims that invention is creating a new thing, while innovation is making change and contributing something new based on existing things. I agree with him. “Invention” is to create something from nothing, and it emphasizes “the first”; “innovation” is to make something better. Moreover, since every company has different status and resources, “innovation” might not be the first one, but it could not be exactly the same. Another point is that we can distinguish inventions from their positive and negative impact. The positive one is like computer, which improves technology development; the negative one, like computer virus, destroys people’s data. However, “innovation”
The American Fear of Being Sued Something basic has been stolen from American life. We have lost much of our individual freedom due to the theft in our society. Our thieves come in the form of "sue happy" Americans. Doctors are paranoid, teachers are weakened and religious consultation is decreased. You would have to be a fool to say what you really think in the workplace.
...ge of information, but there are arguments that this is not the case. For example, some may say that the courts made it too difficult to prove copyright infringement because there are ways for companies to deliberately avoid copyright infringement (look up “clean room design”) while still creating a program that is, for all practical purposes, identical to the original. Taking everything into account, intellectual property law is not perfect. It was established long before anyone could have known about the challenges and intricacies of protecting one’s intellectual property that are seen today. Intellectual property laws were not conceived with technology in mind. This being said, courts are working to hear and rule on such cases in order to establish guidelines and precedent, all while attempting to maintain the spirit in which intellectual property laws were made.
Intellectual Property Law used to only protect art, music, and literature, but because of technological development, Intellectual Property Law now also protects a greater variety of innovations including designs, inventions, symbols, discoveries, and words. The phrase “intellectual property” was first known to be used in the late 1700’s; however, it was not widely talked about, nor was the Intellectual Property Law in actuality commonly implemented. Intellectual Property Rights slowly gained more attention by mid-1800’s after the Industrial Revolution had taken place: more companies were created, competition between corporations became fiercer, and owning unique innovations were crucial to winning the competition. However, as Intellectual Property
As we said above patents grant exclusive rights to an invention or a process of making and invention. So what does a patent cover? Chemical patents cover the structure of a molecule and also the process in which the molecule is made. This is a good thing for pharmaceutical companies who take out these patents as they can regulate the market. Because these companies own the rights of a molecule or drug exclusively they can restrict competition from competitors. Companies that have patents on drugs have the added benefit that they are the sole distributor of that drug and all profits go to them. Other companies cannot repl...
Because of its intangible nature, and particularly the increase of the digital domain and the internet as a whole, computers and cyber piracy make it easier for people to steal many forms of intellectual property. Due to this major threat, intellectual property rights owners’ should take every single measure to protect their rights. Unless these rights are either sold, exchanged, transferred, or appropriately licensed for use in exchange for a monetary fee, they should be protected at all cost. In order to protect these rights, the federal and states governments have passed numerous laws and statutes to protect intellectual property from misappropriation and infringement. “The source of federal copyright and patent law originates with the Copyright and Patent ...
This article mainly focuses on the ethics and its importance in the daily life and the need of the ethics to the individual and to the society. It mainly focuses on the ethical theories; consequence based theory, duty based theory, contract based theory and character based theory and how these theories are implemented for the copyright infringement i.e. the free access of the copyright material. It explains all the four types of theories in detail with examples and how these are implemented for the given topic. The modern ethical approach has been given based on the four ethical theories and the recommendations based on the outcome of the four theories. It is followed by the conclusion and the references.
At the end of the day, the decision on if and how intellectual property (IP) protection is sought must be made in the context of an organizations IP strategy and keeping in line with the organization goals and objectives. For company who prefer to compete in the free market, copyrighted software is sufficient in protecting the legal rights of the software created. For company whose main objective is to collect licensing rights and back end deals that comes with patent protection, than it is advisable to seek for patent protection. For me, a copyright is more than sufficient to acknowledge an invention and the inventor’s rights to claim.
In this paper, I will show that there are two main problems with licensing. First, the exact definitions of specific sub-fields are still unclear because the field continues to change rapidly. This makes it difficult for a licensing board to make guarantees to the public. Second, innovation is important to computing, and the licensing process could actually slow progress. For these reasons, I argue that certification is a more practical approach.
Duquenoy, P., Jones, S., & Blundell, B. (2008). Ethical, legal and professional issues in computing. London: Thomson.
Patents claims focus of the mechanism, principles and components surrounding those ideas. Patents are the strongest of the law to protect the intellectual property. Patent law is based on a very strict liability standard, making a business owner’s strongest option for intellectual property protection. Patents often make use of reverse engineering. Through reverse engineering, they see if patented inventions are in used by another company. Patents have an expiration date; the design patent protect design, shape, configuration and appearance of any invention for 14 years, and utility patents that protect functional makeover and new invention last for 20