Computer Ethics, Summer 2010

Corboy Law Room 323
3:35-5:45 TWθ
Goals:

understanding traditional ethical theories in the context of computing technology
understanding legal theories of computing & information
understanding some of the social consequences of computing technology

Example: is file-sharing stealing, if nobody lost anything?

Overview of some issues:

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 act

from marketers

personal profiles

rfid

from copyright holders (RIAA lawsuits, ISP actions)

legal records

per-use content management

Facebook

software patents

what is the purpose of software patents? To enforce ownership rights, or to improve technology?

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

Terry Childs

encryption

antitrust issues

open source

professional issues

responsibilities and liabilities

talking to your supervisor

Week 1 Readings

Read all of chapter 1 and the first three sections of chapter 4, especially:
   cellphone case-study in 1.2.2
   ATM case study of change brought by technology in 1.3.1
   What is ethics? 1.4.1
    What is intellectual property?: §4.1.1

1.4.2: ethical theories
There are two great (classes of) ethical theories:
   1. Deontological: rules-based
   2. Utilitarian: consequences-based
   3. Relativism: superficially appealing, but ultimately unsatisfactory

Midterm, final exam, 3 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!

§1.3.1: Evaluation of Automatic Teller Machine side-effects

bank-teller unemployment
alienation (no human contact at the bank)
electronic trail
crime (robberies at ATMs)
errors -- what if the wrong amount is dispensed?

Walter Wriston was CEO of CitiBank in the 1970's when ATMs were then widely deployed in New York City. Wriston was at one point credited with the realization that many if not most New Yorkers actually preferred ATMs to using human tellers; they did not particularly like that form of human contact. [source: newspaper article I read long ago]

Furthermore, ATMs are available when it's convenient for you; many banks still have very limited late hours.

As for unemployment, Baase has data that tell a different story:
    1983   480,000
    1993   301,000    ( this drop was due in part to ATMs)
    2006   600,000   Wow!

As for the electronic trail, that exists equally for teller transactions. If you live in a small town, the ATM is likely to offer greater privacy.

One proposal for addressing ATM crime is to give patrons a "duress PIN", eg their regular PIN backwards. The main reason this has never been implemented is that there appears to be little need for it.

§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: computing supplies many examples of classical ethical dilemmas in a new context.

2. New rules required as we adapt to new technology. Examples:

netiquette
facebook stalking
Privacy rules and online information collected by others
Privacy rules and what we can be required to give up in order to use Facebook
responsibility for libel (should ISPs be accountable?)
protecting children from inappropriate material

3. Varied sources of solutions to new problems. Example: cell phone case study, Section 1.2. Cell phones led to:

more outdoor risk-taking
talking while driving
texting while driving
courtesy & rudeness
cameras, lack of awareness of them, and privacy
status-symbol division

4. Global scope of the Internet: good and bad
   jurisdictional chaos: if you buy online, where do you file the lawsuit?
    it is harder to be isolated (this was meant as a "good" at the time I wrote it; now I'm less sure)
    very wide, low-cost distribution of knowledge

5. Tradeoffs
   between privacy and convenience. True of computers, true of door locks.


Computers are a form of technology. Why do we talk about "computer ethics" but not "automobile ethics" or "aircraft ethics"? (Note that we do talk about medical ethics and biotechnology ethics.)

Ethics

personal actions
business actions
imposing constraints on others, through laws & mores

Some people like to distinguish between ethics and morals by saying morals are what we do; ethics is the study of morality, or how we reason about what we do.

Are we going to figure out right and wrong here? No. But we will figure out how to:

analyze problems
identify STAKEHOLDERS
understand both sides of the issue
identify ethical reasoning & principles involved: deontological theories ("deon" = duty) versus consequentialism

Law

What are laws for?

justice
civil order
enforcement of societal norms
results of (usually corporate) lobbying
consistent basis for economic activity

For the last one, note that the goal is to encourage investment. Possibly at the expense of justice! (Think about that one; is that a bad thing?)

CRIMINAL v CIVIL law

What the rules are:
   contracts
   torts (non-contractual obligations)
   criminal law

What is "illegal"? Are copyright violations "illegal"? Usually, something is "illegal" if it involves a violation of criminal law. Defamation (libel/slander), for example, is seldom referred to as "illegal", despite the potential legal consequences.

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:
       Note the New York State "Supreme" courts are the ones to hear parking infractions.

Judges write OPINIONS, which carry significant weight with other judges.

Music file sharing

David Post (Temple Univ Law School) [Sometime around 2000?]
If seven million people are stealing, they're not stealing.

What did Dr Post mean by that?

Questions about what you download (from better to worse?)

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)
Is it ok to download music files off the internet?

Most people would probably be ok with all but #6 here. Note that #2 might be construed as illegal if the party were in any way not a "private home affair". One court did rule against #5, in a lawsuit against mp3.com.

Some of the first early popular sites on the internet were song-lyric repositories. Sometime in the late 90's most of the originals apparently got cease-and-desist letters; one industry-supported site would display the lyrics but wouldn't let you copy or save them, and the display would vanish after ~20 seconds. (Had the developers not been aware of screen-capture?)

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?

Now let's expand the previous list to focus on file sharing.:

Is it ok to borrow a friend's CD?
Is it ok to give a digital 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?

Many people have trouble with #3, though it somewhat depends on who you mean by "friend" (cf #5).

One classic slippery-slope argument is the 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 distribution of smuggled 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.

Is it legal for me to play this in class?

One way to look at these slippery slopes is to be very wary of "incremental" arguments in ethics. On the other hand, another view (which we'll come to) is that the real issue with copyright is preserving the musician's ability to earn money, and (perhaps) therefore anything that doesn't actually interfere with that is ok. Which of the items on the list might interfere with the musician's income?

Conflict:

if music downloads are seen as being like radio, they're clearly ok. (What if they're seen as being like youtube?)
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!!

Keep this "harm is not wrong" idea in mind.