Feb

02

What is the “life cycle” of cyber and computer ethics issues?

Cyberlaw and Ethics
Cat5Earth_600x400

The “life cycle” of cyber and computer ethics as explained by Don Gotterbarn, is a matter that all persons that deal with computers should be aware of. Based on my own experience I feel his statements are correct, and that there is limitless potential damage to be caused by computers if we are not careful. This life cycle is basically an evolution a person goes through from a innocent intriguing stage, to an illusion and abuse of power, to a later stage that hopefully all people grow to in which there is a thorough understanding of the ethics and values involved with technology and as a result the person respects the use of technology, and does not abuse it.

There is also the life cycle of technology in general which begins with “The Age of Innocence” where computers where only used by a limited amount of people, and there was not much potential for harmful actions, although there were unethical practices at that time; including IBM creating computers for the processing of Jews in concentration camps during the Holocaust. Later this evolved to the “Age of Power and Control” which we are currently in right now, and hopefully there will eventually be an evolution to a higher level, but I am not so hopeful for that.

Essentially we should be aware of this process, and make sure we do not get too lost in the “power and control” stage, but rather pass through it swiftly. There have been many technological advancements that have had more of a negative impact than positive, simply because the person developing the technology did not evaluate the ethical aspects of the technology. I feel there is more of a need for ethics in Computer Science, and Information Technology, particularly with the advancements in biometric technology, and computer controlled weapons, as well as many others that many may not think of like data mining in social media networks. Technology can and will take over our world if we are not careful, so it is very important to use it responsibly.

Posted by | 0 comments
Feb

02

What is biometric technology, and what kinds of ethical issues do certain uses of that technology raise?

Cyberlaw and Ethics
shiny-world-map_600x400

Biometric technology is a major emerging industry, which is supported by many financial giants, including banks, IT firms, and the government. This technology was originally developed to verify the identity of persons by a requested body part, whether it be a person’s eye, finger, facial recognition, and many other means, such as voice recognition. In order for this system to work, a computer must store a template of the specific person’s eye, or other part, and when called upon the computer will attempt to match it with the template on file.

For most people at first glance this seems to be a great advancement in technology, and it will most likely just add to the security of the country. Although that may be the case, like Irma Van der Ploeg, I have many concerns about the emergence of this new technology, particularly with the governments use. This technology may become so advanced that complete government control of people’s daily lives becomes inevitable. What started as a fingerprint instead of a time card to document the hours an employee works, may grow to a technology where the law enforcement will arrest you for thinking of committing a crime; which could have just been a fleeting thought.

This technology could have many positive traits as far as security, but the question we must ask ourselves is, how much freedom are we willing to give up for security, or better yet do we have any say in that matter? People seem to instinctually abuse the available information to them, similar to how many search engines now use the private data in your emails, to cross-channel market to people based on the information they write, or receive in their emails. My main concern is that there will come a point in time, where I am fearful of speaking my mind because there is a facial recognition camera on a satellite recording my every word, and could possibly persecute me for thinking illegally. Maybe this is farfetched, and maybe I am a conspiracy theorist, but this sure is something to be cautious of.

Posted by | 0 comments
Feb

02

Amazon vs. Barnes and Noble in the case concerning business method patents.

Cyberlaw and Ethics
AmazonBarnesNoble_600x400

There are many views about the case of Amazon vs. Barnes and Noble, and I personally have a pretty strong view. This case which was mainly involving Barnes and Noble creating a program with similar functionality to Amazon’s “one click” system, which allowed consumers to purchase with one click, provided they have already setup a account with Amazon. Naturally as a corporation, its main objective is to protect the investment of its shareholders; usually done by any means necessary, and unfortunately these means are not always too ethical, at least in my eyes.

Patent law is a very difficult and controversial topic, particularly in this new age of technology as the advancements have been so rapid that it is difficult to keep up. In the case of the “one click” system, I feel that it is unethical to patent this, as it is an idea, and it is not even proven that they have come up with the idea they just have the lawyers to defend it. My ideas may be a bit biased though, I do have years of experience with doing business with Amazon, and many of their practices, like most corporations are unethical. Another example of this struggle in patent law is a current struggle Amazon is having with lawmakers to patent data mining, which is a process of gathering and analyzing data. But then again it is legal to patent DNA, so it is difficult to make the distinction to what is right or wrong. Business at one time was about providing service, now it seems like a way to extract the most amount of money from the population as possible.

Posted by | 0 comments
Feb

02

Is the suing of Americans by the RIAA for copyright infringement justified?

Cyberlaw and Ethics
sharingiscaring_600x400

I feel that the recording industry does present a reasonable need for the RIAA, and I do feel that utilizing this organization in order in order to discourage copyright infringement by legal action is justified; provided their claims are reasonable, as many are extreme in my eyes. America’s copyright laws must be respected in America, for not doing so could cause the incurrence of a law suit. Now we must respect copyright laws, but in order to do so we must be clear on what they are.

America’s copyright laws, have many grey areas as far as digital mediums are concerned. From a legal standpoint, it may be illegal to share songs on the internet, depending on many key factors, how it will be used, whether it affects the market of the music, if the music is copyrighted, among other details. As far as if it is morally right or wrong, in my opinion I feel that we should respect the rights of the artists, but not become so strict that we are unable to share music at all.

We may share music, however in America there are some restrictions, mainly in there are of fair use. Mainly if the music is being used to profit from, that would violate the copyright law, but you may share, or play the music in basically any physical space you want. There is also the copying of a mp3 version of song you have already, which would not violate copy right law, or also listening to a song to evaluate whether or not you want to purchase the song, this would be allowed also.

Posted by | 3 comments
Feb

02

Should Intellectual Property be protected on the internet?

Cyberlaw and Ethics
LegalSystemsOfTheWorldMap_600x400

Intellectual Property Rights have pros, as well as cons associated with them, particularly in the area of the internet. Now the internet was originally developed to encourage the spread of information, however many would argue that Intellectual Property Rights prevents that. So, I feel that Intellectual Property should be protected only if the creator or owner wishes it so. Essentially as a artist myself, I am a strong supporter of the Free Culture Movement, including Creative Commons, Open Source Software, and other things of the like. However, I do feel that if someone wishes to protect their works on the internet, they should have the right and ability to do so, with little effort.

Many countries do not support intellectual property laws as the U.S. does, and in these cases it is my feeling that any person should have the right to protect his or her works on the internet, and the U.S. should respect that right, regardless of the publishers location. But this becomes a very difficult issue, as enforcing these rights has become one of the most difficult tasks launched on the internet community. This is especially true of countries outside of America, were we have no jurisdiction, the current system will require a lot of improvement to fully address this. I do feel that people should respect each other’s natural rights, whether in the U.S. or not, but I don’t think we have much right to instill our ideals on others. This seems to be a common idea, as there was never a full resolution with this issue when many countries attempted to resolve it with a treaty in Geneva in 1996, but there is still no consensus.

Posted by | 5 comments
© Copyright chris nolte