Fall 2008 25EP Room 602 4:15-6:45 Mondays Overview of some issues: copyright (ch 4) file sharing whether there is such a thing as "intellectual property" DMCA: Digital Millenium Copyright Act privacy (ch 2) from employers from government security matching / fraud prevention patriot acts from marketers personal profiles rfid from copyright holders (RIAA lawsuits, ISP actions) legal records per-use content management software patents open source software licensing legal issues regarding "click" contracts trusting your software speech encryption dmca software anonymity libel hoaxes trust and the web e-commerce information reliability security: phishing, certificates, etc trusting your software spyware voting & democracy hacking kutztown 13 randall schwartz encryption antitrust issues open source professional issues responsibilities and liabilities talking to your supervisor +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Week 1 Read 1.3.1 (ATMs), 1.3.2 (why), 4.1 For week 2: read all of Chapter 1, especially section 1.4 Midterm, final exam, ~4 papers Plagiarism rules: be sure ALL quotations are marked as such, and also cited. When you write, be sure you organize your points clearly and address the question. Grammar and style count for MUCH less! =============== 1.3.2: "Themes" Why study computer ethics? 1. Look at old problems in new setting. Do old analogies apply? Classic case: copyright. Note that in some sense computing provides a testbed for classical ethics 2. New rules required as we adapt to new technologiy Example: netiquette / facebook stalking Privacy rules 3. Varied sources of solutions to new problems Cell phone case study, Section 1.2 Cell phones led to: more outdoor risk-taking talking while driving courtesy & rudeness cameras, lack of awareness of them, and privacy status-symbol division 4. Globalization: good and bad jurisdictional chaos harder to be isolated 5. Tradeoffs between privacy and convenience Ethics personal actions business actions imposing constraints on others, through laws & mores Are we going to figure out right and wrong here? No. But we *will* figure out how to: * analyze problems * identify STAKEHOLDERS * identify ethical reasoning & principles involved deontological theories ("deon" = duty) consequentialism =================================== Law What are laws for? * justice * civil order * enforcement of societal norms * consistent basis for economic activity goal: encourage INVESTMENT Note this one is a little different from what you might suppose; justice is a distant second to consistency! * Result of corporate lobbying CRIMINAL v CIVIL law * What the rules are: contracts torts (non-contractual obligations) criminal law * legal safeguards for you or your organization economic consequences of established rules the "rule of law" * how the law is actually being interpreted Law and the courts Federal Supreme court Circuit courts District courts State courts: Judges write OPINIONS, which carry significant weight with other judges. ======================================================================= ======================================================================= [[ Summary of issues regarding file sharing discussion of property, and "intellectual property", natural law, the Constitution limitations on copyright biases in the term "intellectual property" theft? napster defense US Copyright law; categories; fair use importance to business & arts ]] David Post (Temple Univ Law School): "If seven million people are stealing, they're not stealing." Questions about what you download: Is it ok to download music files? Is it ok to listen to the radio? Is it ok to play the radio at a party? Is it ok to record off the radio? What about TV? What about downloading lyrics? What if I ALREADY OWN THE CD? (either lyrics or entire tracks) What if I just want to listen to a song I know my kids are listening to? Does information really just "want to be free"? Is there a conflict between copyright and free speech? ======================= Why isn't the illegal copying of books (eg through photocopying) a major issue? Why wasn't the illegal production of audio cassette tapes (from LPs, radio broadcasts, and live concerts) a major issue? ======================= Questions about what you share: Is it ok to listen to a friend's CD? Is it ok to give a copy of a track to a friend? Is it ok to give a copy of an entire CD to a friend? Is it ok to let your friend pay you for the blank disk? Is it ok if you just met your friend 30 seconds ago, for the sole purpose of selling the cd, and the price also includes a nominal copying charge? cf Bart & Fat Tony d'Amico scene in Simpsons 8F03, written by John Swartzwelder At work, Fat Tony gives Bart a present, in gratitude for his help with the cigarettes. Bart: Uh, say, are you guys crooks? Tony: Bart, um, is it wrong to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving family? Bart: No. Tony: Well, suppose you got a large starving family. Is it wrong to steal a truckload of bread to feed them? Bart: Uh uh. Tony: And, what if your family don't like bread? They like... cigarettes? Bart: I guess that's okay. Tony: Now, what if instead of giving them away, you sold them at a price that was practically giving them away. Would that be a crime, Bart? Bart: Hell, no! Tony: Enjoy your gift. ======================= Conflict: if music downloads are seen as being like radio, they're clearly ok. If they're seen as in-lieu-of-CD-purchase, they're more like theft. *Is* downloading the same as theft? DISCUSSION Yes: artists don't get the money they would otherwise get No: nobody loses anything Software-copying model: people who illegally copy software often would never buy it; they're just "collecting". No sale is lost in these cases. Lost sales: if you build a better mousetrap, my mousetrap business may lose sales. Lost sales -- or other harm -- is NOT necessarily wrong!! ======================= ======================= Music downloads and INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY What is the LEGAL basis for protection? Copyright Is there such a thing as "Intellectual Property"? Intellectual property is the work-product of the human mind. How about IDEAS are the work-product of the human mind Can ideas (including music) be PROPERTY? What *is* property? (Legal and social definitions) "the right of use, control, and disposition" (Cornell site) the "expectation ... of being able to draw such or such an advantage from the thing" in question [Jeremy Bentham, quoted in Wikipedia] Real property Personal property Intellectual property Traditionally, "real property" is considered much more *tangible*. Nobody can walk off with it, for example. However, easements are a form of intangible real property right. Other abstract property: mineral rights (especially unexercised) options to buy a thing at a future date for a set price (options) 200 bushels of corn delivered in November 2010 (futures) utility easement construction "air" rights right to fly over certain areas software license (accepted at face value!) Natural law notion: you have a right to things you have created with your own labor (eg things you have made). You have a right to things you have earned. Classic proponent: John Locke 1632-1704 (mentioned p 33) Natural right to REAL property is slightly hazier in theory, but much more solid in practice. The frontier version of the theory was that you have the right to the land you have settled, developed, and farmed; the practice is that you have the right to use your land as you see fit (subject to zoning, water, and environmental laws). The big question: Do we have natural rights to IDEAS? Tradition goes both ways. Ideas meet the Lockian test of things created with your own effort, BUT many ideas have also traditionally been regarded as in the "public domain". Alternative to natural rights is sometimes called "legal rights" or "social rights": rights assigned by law for a social goal. ========================== US Constitution states (the "copyright clause") Article I, Section 8 - Powers of Congress ... To establish Post Offices and Post Roads; To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for LIMITED Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court; ... What is "limited"? ========================== What does this say about the nature of our "right" to our works and inventions? Pretty clearly NOT a natural right. How can it be property, if it goes away? People ask this now, seriously, as if it should be obvious that copyright should be perpetual. "property" suggests all sorts of implications. But how can it be property if you can download the song and I still have everything I had before? Under the law, the notion of "intellectual property" makes perfect sense; there are lots of limited and/or intangible forms of property. But mostly nobody but lawyers is familiar with these. To most people, the word "property" suggests something that is MINE, like the $5 bill in my wallet (which, alas, I spent). Property suggests certain rights: right to determine all forms of use right to legal enforcement right to decide how to dispose of property sell, buy, lease, inherit What about this "limited-time" property? Property-rights view suggests that the limited-time model is a huge concession. But commons view suggests that *any* rights to the creator are a consession. Property-rights view of ideas introduces BIASES. What about "FAIR USE": the notion that some copying is legit. The original notion was to allow exerpting for quotes and reviews. THe use should be relatively noncommercial (educational was best), and should not diminish the market for the original. ===================